Skip to main content

Full text of "Cyclopaedia of biblical literature"

See other formats

; ii 


V. - 

. m 

|^- ~»<g liu — iX'®'g gg!! j>» ©^^9 3^5^6 S<g gE ^>6 ?^^*>6-^- 


I /f\ PRINCETON, N. il . 1 

the "J 


which v • pj ■ en ted ' /■ 
Mj^srp! R. L. and A. St.; 

Shelf,/ yi Section 

( ' J 


^ 1 ' 

r .'-v 








, y 


t 1 « » - * • ■ • • 










VOL. I. 






Digitized by the Internet Archive 

in 2011 with funding from 

Princeton Theological Seminary Library 



W. L. A Rev. W. L. Alexander, M.A., Author of ' The Connexion and Harmony of 

, the Old and New Testaments,' &c. 

G. B Rev» G. Bauk, Ph. D. of the University of Giessen. 

J. R. B Rev. J. R. Beard, D.D., Member of the Historico-Theological Society of 


G. M. B G. M. Bell, Author of ' Universal Mechanism/ &c. 

C. H. F. B. . . . Rev. C. H. F. Bialloblotzky, Ph. D., Gottingen, Author of • De Abrogatione 

J. B Rev. John Brown, D.D., Professor of Exegetical Theology to the United 

Secession Church. 

G. B. ....... . Rev. George Bush, Professor of Hebrew and Oriental Literature in the 

University of New York. 

J. D. B ." . Rev. James D. Butler, Abbot Resident, Theological Seminary, Andover, 

United States. 

K. A. C K. A. Credner, Doctor and Professor of Theology in the University of 


S. D Rev. S. Davidson, LL.D., Professor of Biblical Literature and Oriental 

Languages in the Lancashire Independent College. 

B. D Rev. Benjamin Davies, D.D. 

J. F. D Rev. J. F. Denham, M.A., St. John's College, Cambridge, F.R.S. 

J. W. D Rev. J. W. Doran, LL.D., Association Secretary of the Church Missionary 


J. E Rev. John Eadie, LL.D., Professor of Biblical Literature to the United 

Secession Church. 

G. H. A. v. E. . G. H. A. von Ewald, Doctor and Professor of Theology in the University 
of Tiibiiigen. 

F. W. G Rev. F. W. Gotch, M.A., Trinity College, Dublin. 

H. A. C. H. . . . H. A. C. Havernick, Doctor and Professor of Theology in the University 
of Konigsberg. 

E. W. H E. W. Hengstenberg, Doctor and Professor of Theology in the University 

of Berlin. 

J. J Rev. J. Jacobi, of the University of Berlin. 

R. J Rev. R. Jamieson, M.A., Editor of * Paxton's Illustrations of Scripture.' 

E. A. L. ..... Rev. E. A. Lawrence, Haverhill, United States. 




r, l Rev. Eobert Lee, D.D., Edinburgh. 

p E> L Fkedeeick R. Lees, Ph. D., F.S.S.A. ; Editor of The Truth-Seeker,' &c. 

E. M E. Micbelson, Ph. D..of the University of Heidelberg. 

p # M Peter Mearns, Author of ' Tirosh,' &c. 

N # M Rev. N. Morren, MA., Author of ' Biblical Theology,' and Translator of 

' Rosenmiiller's Biblical Geography.' 

p. W. N F. W. Newman, late Fellow of Balliol College, Oxford. 

j n John Nicholson, B.A., Oxford, Ph. D., Tubingen, Author of ' An Account 

of the Establishment of the Fatemite Dynasty,' Translator of ' Ewald's 
Hebrew Grammar.' 

W. A. N W. A. Nicholson, M.D. 

j. p. p Rev. John Phillips Potter, M.A.. Oriel College, Oxford. 

p p E E v. Baden Powell, M.A., F.R.S., F.G.S., Savilian Professor of Geometry 

in the University of Oxford. 

j. p E J. F. Royle, M.D., F.R.S., F.L.S., F.G.S., Member of the Royal Asiatic 

Societies of Calcutta and London ; Professor of Materia Medica and 
Therapeutics in King's College, London. 

J. E. B J. E. Eyland, Translator of ' Neander's Church History,' and of ' Semisch's 

Justin Martyr.' 

C. H. S Lieut.-Colonel C. Hamilton Smith, K.H. and K.W., F.R. and L.S., 

President of the Devon and Cornwall Natural History Society, &c. &c 

J. p. S Eev. J. Pje Smith, D.D., F.R.S., F.G.S. 

H. S Eev. H. Stebbing, D.D. of St. John's College, Cambridge, Author of ' A 

History of the Church,' &c. 

A. T Eev. A. Tholuck, Doctor and Professor of Theology in the University of 


D. W. ....... Eev. David Welsh, D.D., Professor of Divinity and Church History, New 

College, Edinburgh. 

L. "W Eev. Leonard Woods, D.D., Professor of Theology in the Andover Theo- 
logical Seminary, United States. 

W. W Eev. William Wright, M.A. and LL.D. of Trinity College, Dublin, 

Translator of ' Seller's Biblical Hermeneutics.' 

The initials of the Contributors of the following articles have been inadvertently omitted :— 
J. R. B., Roman Empire ; Tabernacles, Feast of. — H. A. C. H., Genesis. — J. F. R., 
Spices ; Stohax ; Tajiar, 1 ; Tbil Tree ; Tirzah, 1. — W. W., Jude \ Nebuchad- 


The present work was undertaken with the design of providing the public with 
a more complete view of the existing state of Biblical literature, both at home 
and abroad, than it previously possessed. It was felt that former works of the 
kind, numerous as they are, and useful as some of them may be considered, 
were built too exclusively upon the ' old learning ' of Calmet and others ; and 
that some recent attempts to give a more modern character to such under- 
takings had been made too entirely from home materials, and had too ex- 
clusive reference to such external facts and circumstances as travellers' and 
antiquarians offer, to meet the demands of the present time. The work, there- 
fore, owes its 'origin to the Editor's conviction of the existence of a great body 
of untouched materials, applicable to such a purpose, which the activity of 
modern research and the labours of modern criticism had accumulated, and 
which lay invitingly ready for the use of those who might know how to avail 
themselves of such resources. 

It was no task for one man to gather in this great harvest. And as the 
ground seemed, for the most part, common to all Christian men, it appeared 
desirable that assistance should be sought from a sufficient number of competent 
Biblical scholars and others, without distinction of country or religious party, 
that the field might be the more thoroughly swept, and the greater wealth of 
illustration obtained, from men of different lines of reading and various habits of 
thought. The prompt manner in which the call of the Editor for co-operation 
has been met by the numerous eminent Biblical scholars and naturalists, whose 
names appear in the List of Contributors, has been among the highest gratifica- 
tions arising to him out of this undertaking ; while the ability, the laborious 
research, the care and the punctuality, with which they have discharged the 
various tasks confided to them, demand his warmest acknowledgments. 

The only drawback likely to arise from co-operation so various and exten- 
sive, lay in the probability that considerably different views might be manifested 
in the several articles ; and that, too, on subjects on which every reader is 
likely to have formed some opinion of his own, and will be disposed to regard as 


viii PREFACE. 

erroneous or suspicious every opinion which may not entirely coincide with that 
which he has been accustomed to entertain. In this lay the sole danger and 
the greatest difficulty of such an undertaking. Here was to be a book which 
no one man, and not even a very few men, could produce ; and which 
the public would yet probably expect to exhibit as much unity, not only of 
«} plan and execution, but of opinion and sentiment, as if it were the produce 
of a single mind. The Editor, however, felt that he could not undertake 
to find forty independent thinkers among whom there should be no visible 
diversities of sentiment. But he thought that much might be done in pro- 
ducing so near an approach to uniformity on matters of real importance as 
would satisfy every reasonable reader ; especially when he should come to con- 
sider that the choice lay between taking the work with such diversities as 
necessarily arose from the extent of the co-operation employed in its produc- 
tion, or of altogether dispensing with the immense amount of Biblical informa- 
tion which it embodies. Entire uniformity, if attainable at all, could only 
have been attained at the cost of providing a very different and greatly in- 
ferior work ; and a work thus different and inferior could not have established 
a distinction sufficiently marked from all previous undertakings of the kind to 
justify its production. 

It has not consisted with the Editor's idea of the functions he had under- 
taken, to dictate to the Contributors the views they were to take of the subjects 
intrusted to them, or to set up his own views as the standard of correct opinion. 
This he must have done, had he made it his rule to insert only such statements 
as exactly coincided with his own sentiments, or to exclude altogether whatever 
views of particular subjects might differ from those with which his own mind 
is satisfied. The Contributors were expected to abstain from introducing the 
opinions peculiar to their nation or to their religious communion ; but they 
have been under slight restraint with respect to the conclusions which they 
might form as independent thinkers and reasoners, competent by their attain- 
ments and studies to form a judgment worthy of attention on the various matters 
coming under their consideration. In conformity with no other principle could 
this work have been produced ; and such being the nature of its execution, it 
became necessary that the initials of the several writers should be affixed to 
their contributions, that the reader might know to whom to ascribe the respon- 
sibility of the particular articles, and that no one contributor might be deemed 
responsible for any other articles than those to which his signature is annexed. 
The Editor also, who has provided all those articles which bear no signature 
(except those adverted to at the end of the List of Contributors), does not hold 
himself responsible for any statements or opinions advanced in any other articles 
than these. Some of them exhibit opinions in which he is not able to concur, 
but which have nevertheless been furnished by persons whom he could not 
regard as less competent than himself to arrive at just conclusions. 

Yet although some explanation is due to those who may possibly find in this 


work, in a few articles, opinions in which they cannot agree, and views from 
which their own differ ; it is right that the persons engaged in producing it should 
claim for it a judgment founded not upon particular articles, but upon its general 
character, which was intended to be, and is, in accordance with the known standards 
of orthodox opinion in this country, as may be ascertained by reference to those 
leading articles which may be regarded as stamping the character of any work 
in which they are found. In fact, a Cyclopaedia of Biblical Literature, as 
distinct from Theology properly so called, offers less occasion than might at 
first sight appear for the obtrusion of those matters of doctrine and discipline 
which Christian men regard with differences of opinion which the Editor would 
fain believe to be less wide and less important than is too generally supposed. 
In the dispensations of Divine Providence, he has been by physical privations 
shut out from many of those external influences and associations which tend to 
magnify such differences, and to deepen into impassable gulfs the space which lies 
between them. He has not found this condition a disadvantage in conducting 
the work which he has now the happiness of having brought to a conclusion ; 
nor will he venture to regard that condition as an unmitigated evil, if, through 
the complete isolation in which he has thereby been placed, he has been enabled, 
without any compromise of the views he conscientiously entertains and which 
his oivn writings will sufficiently indicate, to realize more extensive co-operation 
in this undertaking than under pastoral or official connection with any religious 
denomination he could expect to have attained. It is believed that the English 
language has -no other book which eminent foreign scholars have co-operated 
with our own in producing ; and it is certain that it possesses no other work 
which embodies the combined labours of writers who, indeed, are of different 
communions here, and are known by different names among men, but who have 
the same hope in this world, and but one name in heaven. 

The nature of the present work, and the place which its conductors desire it 
should occupy in the Biblical Literature of this country, will be best under- 
stood by a sketch of the whole field in which that place is marked out. This 
will show not only what is here attempted, but how much of this wide and 
fruitful field remains open to the same process of cultivation. For this 
sketch we are indebted to the able pen of Dr. Credner, who has enriched this 
work by several valuable contributions, and by whom it has been prepared 
expressly for the place which it here occupies. It will be understood by most 
readers that the term Theological Encyclopaedia is technically employed on the 
Continent, and is beginning to be employed in this country, to describe the 
whole field of Sacred Literature, of which Biblical Literature, strictly so called, 
is but a part. 

"\A. comprehensive arrangement of all that belongs to the region of human 
knowledge has — not quite properly — been indicated by the term Encyclopaedia, 
i. e., h kukX.jj Tcailda or eynvKkiog iraifola. Another term, Wissenschafts 


Kunde (knowledge of science), has also been applied to that arrangement in 
Germany, when it includes likewise an internal and scientific development of 
the systems and subjects under discussion. In our title, Cyclopedia of Biblical 
Literature, it is obvious that the word ' Cyclopaedia ' cannot be taken in the more 
extended acceptation of the term, but merely so far as the Bible and Theology 
are concerned. As the peculiar province of Biblical Encyclopedia can only be 
clearly understood and denned in its connection with Theological Encyclopedia, 
it may be requisite to describe at length the meaning of the latter and more 
comprehensive term. 

But even the notion of Theological Encyclopaedia in general, is yet of too 
extended range for our purpose, as it might be supposed to comprehend a sys- 
tematic development of all that refers to the knowledge of God generally ; while 
here cognizance can be only taken of some particular branch of that knowledge, 
namely, of that belonging to Christianity alone. Our notice must therefore be 
limited to the Encyclopaedia of Christian theology. But Christian theology 
forms only a special and limited part of general theology. The former^in 
endeavouring to comprehend scientifically the Christian religion, deals altogether 
with a subject of experience. For the Christian religion, or the Christian know- 
ledge of God, is not innate and constitutional in man, or something existing in 
his mind a priori, but is a religion connected with Jesus Christ as its revealer. 
Christian theology is thus a positive or historical science, which can be traced 
from its origin at a known point of time. 

Now, nothing more intimately concerns the spirit of Christian theology than the 
solution of the question, By what standard are we to determine the tenets of the 
Christian religion, or from what source must they be deduced ? It is in the solu- 
tion of this important question that the adherents of the Christian religion divide 
themselves into two large bodies ; the one considers the Scriptures, emanating 
from the Holy Ghost, as the first and last source of knowledge for Christian 
truth, — a source, however, not bounded by time and space, but continuing to flow, 
and pour forth new religious truths within the range of the Church formed under 
the guidance of the Holy Spirit. This doctrine is usually expressed in the follow- 
ing terms : the Catholic Church assumes a double outward source of the know- 
ledge of religious truth, namely, the Apostolic, both Scriptural and traditional. 
The other great religious party makes a very marked distinction between the 
revealed doctrines laid down in the Scriptures and the later views and develop- 
ment of the same by the Church ; in other words, they distinguish between Scrip- 
tural and traditional revelation. Their leading principle is that the Christian 
religion can be derived pure and unalloyed from the Bible alone ; and they 
therefore reject, as unnecessary and unauthorised, all professed sources of reli- 
gious knowledge which are foreign to the Holy Scriptures. As Christians of 
the latter category we here take the Scriptures as the only external source of 
revelation for religious truth ; and in this point of view we also trace the 
outlines of theological science. 


Thus considered, a little examination of the subject leads us to discover in it 
a threefold principle : — 1. An eternal, ever-prevailing, and therefore immutable, 
Christian principle ; 2. Another, established upon this positive foundation : 
and 3. One that is developing itself out of this. Our business is, therefore, not 
with a revealed doctrine which has long since been completed, which had lived, 
lost its spirit, and died ; but with one which, like the human mind itself, is conti- 
nually expanding in youthful vigour — one which, when correctly comprehended, 
exhibits a mutual relationship and equal degree of development with whatever 
stage of culture and civilization its adherents, the Christians, may have reached. 
Thus it has happened that in process of time many truths which must ever be 
most essential to the Christian, have been variously and differently understood 
and interpreted. Every thinking Christian must strive to bring his religious 
opinions and actions into a possible, perfect, and continued harmony with a cor- 
rect view of the doctrines contained in the Bible. Christian Protestantism is 
the spiritual advancement of humanity at the side of the Bible ; and the task of 
Christian theology must thus be to show, not only how far that end has been 
aimed at in past times and until now, but also in what manner man is to strive 
after it in time to come, and to indicate the means by which the teachings of 
the Scriptures are to be exhibited in their true unison with every advancement 
which mankind can make in knowledge and civilization. 

It is thus evident that Christian theology stands in the closest relation to 
all the departments of human knowledge, and more especially to philosophy, to 
which, when duly applied, Christianity has ever been much indebted, — while it 
has caused her great damage and injury whenever its natural and necessary 
boundaries have been overpassed ; and it is not less clear that the efforts of the 
theologian must, above all, be directed towards a due comprehension and a pro- 
gressively seasonable development and advancement of the always living Christian 
spirit contained in the Scriptural doctrines. -This task pie-supposes a proper un- 
derstanding of the Scriptures. Christian theology must, therefore, in the first 
instance, try to solve scientifically the questions — What is meant by Holy Writ? 
How have its doctrines been understood until now? And by what laws are we 
to proceed so as to arrive at a right understanding of their scope and spirit ? 
The results of these inquiries, systematically obtained, form a complete science 
in themselves. As Christianity, however, is not limited to abstract speculations, 
but has for its chief aim the enkindling and diffusion of true piety, in thought 
and in practice, Christian theology has further to display the means by which 
this Christian conviction may be on the one hand called forth in the soul of man 
and diffused abroad, and on the other quickened and defended. Christian theo- 
logy is, finally, required to set forth the course which Christianity has pursued 
in former ages, and to describe its past vicissitudes and present condition. 

The foundation of Christian theology must thus be sought in the Scrip- 
tures : and, divesting ourselves of all prepossessions and hypotheses, it will, in 
the first instance, be necessary for us to obtain a clear insight as to the 


circumstances and the times in which the series of books which constitute the 
Scriptures came into existence. This leads us to the first branch of theological 
science, namely, to Biblical Archeology, or Biblical Antiquities. 
Biblical Archaeology, usually confined within too narrow limits, is that part of 
theological science which tries to unravel the various circumstances and con- 
ditions which have exercised more or less influence upon the composition of the 
Scriptural books. Its object is, therefore, to treat of: — ■ 

1. The nature of the country in which those books have originated ; to this 
branch of inquiry belong Physical Geography and Natural History. By 
the latter Ave understand not only (a common mistake) a systematic survey 
of the natural productions, but also and chiefly an enumeration of the 
peculiar features of their origin, growth, continuance, cultivation, use, etc. 
It is, for instance, quite immaterial what place the date-palms or balsam- 
shrubs occupy in the system — such investigations being of no importance 
for the understanding of the Bible, the writers of which have disre- 
garded those points ; while, on the other hand, the peculiarities of the 
locality where the palm-tree stands, its external appearance at the dif- 
ferent seasons of the year, its growth, fertility, use, etc. — in short, all that 
particularly strikes the sense of the beholder, have frequently exercised 
considerable influence on the inspired writers ; and these sources of 
external impressions on the senses and mind of man, are to be par- 
ticularly considered and noticed by Biblical Archaeology. 

2. The inhabitants of those countries ; their peculiar character, manners, 
customs, way of living, and their intercourse with other nations. 

3. The vicissitudes of their people, — consequently, the history of the 
Hebrews and Jews, down to that time when the last books of the Scrip- 
tures were written. 

4. The politico-religious institutions, the civil and geographical order and 
division of the land and the people ; and 

5. The mental development of the Hebrews and Jews, the regulations 
founded on it, and the degree of progress which the arts and sciences had 
attained among them. 

Biblical Archaeology may be further divided into two classes — that of the 
Old Testament and that of the New Testament : the former may again be sub- 
divided into the Hebrew and the Jewish archaeology. 

As soon as the foundation for Biblical researches is laid by the help of 
Biblical Archaeology, the theologian then turns to the solution of the second main 
question in theology : — "What is meant by the Scriptures ? How and when 
have they arisen ? In what form do they lie before us ? The answer to all 
these questions is the object of Biblical Introduction, or, more correctly, of 
the History of Holy Writ. It is divided into Introduction to the Old Testament 
and Introduction to the New Testament. It must render an account — 


1. Of the origin of the individual books received into the sacred canon ; 
not omitting to notice at the same time the various views that have been 
entertained on that point by critics of all ages, as well as those particular 
opinions which are seemingly the more correct. 

2. Of the origin of the collection of the books of Scripture as the repo- 
sitory of Christian knowledge, or of religion ; constituting the History 
of the Canon. 

3. Of the spread of the Scriptures by transcriptions, translations, and 

4. Of the vicissitudes and fate of the original text ; forming the History 
of the Text; and — 

5. Of the various motives which have led to various modes of under- 
standing the Bible ; being the History of Interpretation, 

"We next come to that important part of Theological Encyclopaedia con- 
nected with the question — 'What precepts have been regarded as Christian 
doctrines from the introduction of Christianity to the present day ? 

The answer to this important question is given by Doctrine-History,* 
which, in a less limited sense than that in which the term is usually taken, points 
out the peculiar doctrines which have from time to time been received as articles 
of Christian belief. But as a variety of opinions with regard to the essentials 
of the Christian, religion has arisen, not only among the various and different 
sects as separate bodies, but likewise at sundry times among the members of 
even one and the same sect or party, Doctrine-History must necessarily include 
all the peculiar features of schismatic views, their origin and history, the causes 
of their rise and gradual development, as well as their connection with the 
Scriptures, from which they all claim to be derived, and by which they must 
be tried. 

A principle that is given out by a Christian sect as an essentially Christian 
doctrine, becomes an article of creed, a dogma (doy/ua = 6 UdoKTat). 

A Dogma is understood to be the doctrine of a particular party or sect, 
although that party may agree with the other sects in respect of other doctrines 
of Christianity, and must necessarily agree with them in regard to the spirit 
and central point of the Christian religion. Such dogmas, or articles of creed, 
are the fruit of a certain way of thinking peculiar to the age in which they arise, 
and obtain clerical importance when received either into the system of Symbols 
or into the public liturgy. All symbols must therefore only be considered as 
belonging to both a certain party and a certain time, and are thus not to be ranked 
among the eternal and universal articles of faith. The exhibition of a finished 
system of doctrines lies beyond the range of Symbolik ; it sets forth merely the 

* Dogmen-geschichte, ' history of doctrines.' We have no corresponding term in the English 
language, and therefore propose that of Doctrine-History. 


most essential truths, the fundamental elements, leaving the farther scientific or 
systematic details to the sphere of Dogmatik. Dogmatik is therefore imme- 
diately linked to the doctrines established by a certain party of Christians. An 
universal Christian Dogmatik is not to be hoped for, so long as there are dif- 
ferent parties among Christians. We should therefore have to range Symbol, 
Dogma, and Dogmatik together, under the comprehensive head of Doctrine- 
History. Such history ought, however, not to be limited to actual dogmas 
alone, but ought likewise to embrace many of the more loose and unembodied 
doctrinal views and speculations ; partly on account of the influence which 
they may have had upon the rise and reception of some embodied dogmas, 
and partly because history shows that some doctrinal views advanced but 
rejected in earlier times, have, perhaps after the lapse of some centuries, been 
reproduced, received, and sanctioned. A comparative survey of the various 
dogmas of the different sects or church parties is the object of Comparative 
Dogmatik ; though it has hitherto limited its views chiefly to the dogmas of the 
principal sects alone. 

It is greatly to be desired that the scope of Comparative Dogmatik should 
be so extended as to embrace the collection of those dogmas which have, from 
time to time, prevailed within the church of one and the same parly — as, e. g., 
of the Roman Catholics, with special regard to the variety of opinions enter- 
tained by this church on some doctrinal points, from her foundation in the 
second century, in comparison with those held in the fourth, fifth, and sixth 
centuries. This function of Doctrine-History has been too much confined to the 
established doctrines within one church-party alone ; and this limitation is almost 
unavoidable with those sects which, like the Roman Catholics, look at all other 
sects as infidels,- — a judgment surely as erroneous as it is partial and uncourteous. 

Christian Morals is, properly speaking, only the practical part of 
Dogmatik, and was, indeed, formerly always exhibited only in its connection 
therewith. Its province is to show the influence which the Christian dogmas 
exercise upon the dispositions of the heart, or in what degree those dogmas 
may be brought into action upon the will of man. What; in our recent times, 
has often been called — especially on the part of some German Protestant theo- 
logians — dogmatics or doctrines of faith, without attaching to them any parti- 
cular meaning of a sect or church-party, partakes mostly of a middle view 
between church dogmatik, Biblical theology, and religious philosophy, Avavering 
between all, and belonging to none. 

Patristics* andPATROLOGY j seem to lie beyond the circle by which we 
have defined the limits of theological science. For the notion attached to the 
term ' Fathers of the Church ' is not universally acknowledged by all Christian 
sects, and least so among Protestants, who consider it a contradiction to the 

* Patristics, the literary character and history of the Fathers, 
f Pathology, the doctrinal and ethical systems founded on their writings. 


principle by which the Scriptures are recognised as the Only source of the 
knowledge of religious truth. 

The immense mass of manifold and various tenets which have prevailed 
as Christian doctrines at different times and in different countries, ever since the 
introduction of Christianity, makes it evidently impossible to ascertain what is 
real Christian doctrine, and what is not, if we do not take the Scriptures as the 
only guide in this labyrinth. The science, therefore, which discloses to us 
the tenets of Holy Writ we call Biblical Exegesis, or Interpretation. It 
involves the difficult task of discovering the true meaning attached to the words 
by the writer. To be able to do this, a thorough knowledge of the language in 
which the author has written down his thoughts is indispensable ; consequently, 
a profound knowledge of Hebrew for the Old Testament, and of Greek for the 
New Testament, is of the utmost necessity, and is one of the first requisites, in an 
expounder of the Bible. But as the Sacred Writings have greatly suffered from, 
and have been disfigured by the liberties of transcribers and emendators, it is 
needful to try to discover or restore the real words of the original text ; and the 
science employed in this task is known by the name of Biblicae Criticism. By 
means of criticism and philological research the sense of the Biblical writings 
may be ascertained, grammatically or philologically. To this mode of exegesis 
or interpretation is given the name of Grammatical Exposition. But although 
it is most essential to correct interpretation of the Scriptures that the text should 
be grammatically considered, yet it is equally undeniable that philological 
exegesis is by" itself insufficient to develope completely the meaning of the 
sacred writers in the words which they employ. To be able to do this completely 
and satisfactorily, it is necessary that the interpreter should possess the means of 
transporting himself into the times and into the spirit of the ages in which those 
writers lived ; or, in other words, that he should be well acquainted with the 
historical conditions of those ages, and with the modes of thought which then 
prevailed ; as well as with the circumstances affecting the particular position 
of the individual writer of every sacred book, and of the people whom he 
addressed. Biblical Archaeology and Biblical Introduction are the proper in- 
struments for the accomplishment of that object, which we call the Historical 
Interpretation of the Scriptures ; the true and perfect Biblical Interpretation is 
thus comprised in the categoiy of Grammatico-Historical Exegesis, — a 
term implying conditions which are hardly ever found in an equal degree of 
profundity in one and the same interpreter. 

A more easy, partial, and objectionable species of interpretation is that 
called Dogmatical Exegesis, which does not limit itself to an independent 
inquiry into the meaning of the sacred writings, but attempts rather to 
determine the sense of the text by arbitrary dogmas. Equally objectionable, 
and still more arbitrary, is the process of the Allegorical mode of expo- 
sition, which tortures the Biblical sense into figurative meanings ; and which 
rarely fails to evince the essential difference that exists between the mode of 


thinking in the author and the interpreter, or between the ancient and 
modern times. 

Hermeneutics establishes the laws by which the interpreter is to proceed 
in his labours. Its relation to Interpretation is that of theory to practice. The 
suggestions which have led to the formation of Biblical Hermeneutics were 
given chiefly by Dogmatical Exegesis. 

The requisites of theology are, however, not confined to the mere endea- 
vour to discover by means of correct exegesis the true meaning of Holy Writ, 
or of particular passages in the New Testament ; but the object of theology as 
a science is also and chiefly to collect the various religious views and doc- 
trines dispersed in the Scriptures, and to compare and unite them into an entire 
system; and this science, aided by exegesis, is called Biblical Theology, 
which is the true corner-stone of Biblical Exegesis. The inquiries involved 
in it are rendered difficult and intricate by the fact that the Scriptures were 
composed by various authors, and at different, and often at very long intervals. 
Biblical Theology must in the first instance be divided into two parts, that .of 
the Old Testament and that of the New Testament. But at the time of the 
rise of Christianity and the writing of the New Testament, the Jews had 
already formed a theology of their own, founded upon what may be called 
exegetical explanations of the religious views set forth in the Old Testament, 
and which, although not essentially wrong in its principles, was considerably at 
variance with historical truth. This system of Jewish theology represents the 
religious opinions which prevailed in the time of Christ, in consequence of the 
peculiar views which the Jews entertained of the Old Testament writings and 
of the revelations contained in them ; and it therefore supplies an intermediate 
link which is often of more direct use to us for understanding the theology of the 
New Testament, than the theology of the Old Testament viewed in its purer 
and more simple results. Neither the Biblical theology of the Old Testament, 
nor the Jewish theology in general, can be of binding force upon Christians, 
except in so far as either may be borne out by the Biblical theology of the New 
Testament. The former bear about the same relation to the latter as Biblical 
archaeology does to the exegesis of the New Testament. 

If the essence of Christianity be made a foundation for farther philosophical 
speculations, we arrive then at Christian Religious-Philosophy, which em- 
bodies into its system some but by no means all the doctrines of Scripture. 

There have always been individuals, ever since Christianity has existed, who 
have particularly employed themselves in diffusing, enlivening, animating, 
and defending the Christian faith ; and in most instances the Church, as an 
independent community, has made the conservation of the Christian interests 
the particular obligation of some of her members. Thus has arisen a science 
for itself, directed towards the care and preservation of Christianity, and 
usually called practical theology. The province of this science is of a 
threefold character : — 

PREFACE. xvii 

2. A guidance to the right method of calling forth Christian conviction 
either in those who had hitherto been attached to another religion, — 
Proselytism, Missionary-studies ; or in those who, although 
Christians, are still in want of Christian instruction, — Catechetics. 

2. The preservation and religious animation of the Church community by 
means either of public worship itself, — Liturgics ; or of edifying dis- 
courses during the same, — Homiletics ; or of that peculiar agency which 
has its sphere in domestic and private life, — Pastoral Theology. 

3. Defence of 'the Christian Church, by diverting the attacks made either 
against her rights, — Church rights ; or against her sublime truths, — 

Finally, Christianity having already existed for very many centuries as a re- 
ligious institution, it must be for every man, as a mm, and more particularly 
for the thinking Christian, of the highest importance to learn the origin of 
Christianity, its propagation and vicissitudes until our present times, and the ex- 
tent and nature of the influence which it has exercised upon its votaries. The 
science which gives information on all these points is called Church History, 
describing all the known facts belonging to the total process of development of 
Christianity. This science is of such an enormous extent as to compel its division 
into several departments, which have also been variously treated. Such are the 
History of the Spread of Christianity ; History of Church Doctrine ; History of 
the Moral Influence of Christianity ; History of Religious Confusions and Fa- 
naticisms arising out of Christianity ; History of Christian Civil Constitutions ; 
History of the Relations of the Church to the State ; Ecclesiastical Antiquities or 
Archaeology ; History of some Christian. Sects, such as, History of tlie Jewish 
Christians ;■ History of the Catholics ; History of the Protestant Church, of 
the Presbyterians, Methodists, etc. ; Church History of some Countries and 
Nations ; History of Christian Literature. In that part of Church History 
which describes the vicissitudes of the Church in times long gone by, the question 
at last suggests itself, What is the present state of Christianity in the world ? 
The science which — far from being as yet sufficiently cultivated — solves this 
important question, goes by the name of Church Statistics, and with it we 
may regard the sphere of Theological Encyclopaedia as completed. 

It cannot lie within the province of the present work as a Cyclopaedia of 
Biblical Literature to embrace in the form of a dictionary all the subjects thus 
described as appertaining to Christian theology. Passing by systematic theology 
(which is the object of dogmatic history), practical theology, and church-history, 
the work comprises those brandies of positive knowledge which are indispensable 
for the understanding of the Bible, and its historical interpretation, including, 
therefore, Biblical Archeology and Biblical Introduction, but leaving the appli- 
cation itself, together with grammatical criticism, to the department of Biblical 
Interpretation. The treatment of these matters in the form here adopted has 

xviii PEEFACE. 

certainly the disadvantage of somewhat obscuring the survey and impeding the 
systematic development of the whole ; but this disadvantage is greatly counter- 
balanced by the benefits arising from the easy and convenient use which in 
this form can be made of the abundant and various materials belonging to the 
subjects discussed : a dictionary of such a character has, moreover, this important 
advantage, that the subjects embraced in its plan can be handled with such 
fulness of criticism as the present age requires. 

Attempts were early made to exhibit information pertaining to the Bible ' 
under the alphabetical arrangement of a dictionary. Of the many works of 
that kind, deserving notice, are : Hierolexicon reale collectum, moderante. Ad. 
Rechenbergio, Lipsiee et Francf, 1714, 2 vols. ; Aug. Calmet, Dictionnaire 
Historique, Critique, Chronologique, Giographique, et Litterale de la Bible, 
Paris, 1722, 2 vols., and (most complete) 1730, 4 vols. fol. ; Dictionnaire 
Universelle, Dogmatique, Canonique, Historique, ct Chronologique des 
Sciences Ecclesiastiques, et avec des Sermons abreges des plus celebres Oraleurs 
Chretiens, par le P. P. Picharcl et autres Religieux Dominicains, etc., Paris, 
1760-64, 5 vols. ; "W". F. Hezel, Biblisches Real-Lexicon, iiber Biblische, und 
die Bibel erlaiitemde alte Geschichte, Erdheschreibung, Zeitrechnung , etc., 
Leipz., 1783-85, 3 vols., 4to. ; F. G. Leun, Bibl. Encyclopcedie, oder exege- 
tisches Real-wbrterbuch iiber die Sdmmtlichen Hidfswissenschaften des Aus- 
legers, nach den Bediirfnissen jetziger Zeit, JDurch eine Gesellschaft von 
Gelehrten. Gotha, 1793-98, 4 vols., 4to. 

Although the work of Calmet was the most learned and practically useful 
of all, the partial standing point of the author rendered it unsuited to the 
enlarged demands of the present age ; which, with the superficiality and 
want of plan in later works, had brought performances of this kind into some 
disrepute ; and it was reserved for George Benedict "Winer, a theologian of 
Leipsic, to restore them to their former credit by his Biblisches Real-worter- 
buch, Leip., 1820, 2 vols., 8vo., of which a second and improved edition was 
published in 1833-38. The sphere of that work is, however, too narrowly 
drawn, the critical treatment in it is of a very unequal character, and many of 
the subjects examined in its pages, especially in the department of* natural his- 
tory, have in reality no relation whatever to the Bible. Similar publications 
by various other writers have been produced on the Continent, but they cannot 
be regarded as exhibiting any claims to scientific criticism, or well-considered 

To particularise the works of the kind produced in our own country might 
appear invidious. It may suffice to say that they have all in their day served 
purposes of more or less usefulness, for which they are no longer available. All 
that has been done till now has been in various degrees based upon Calmet's great 
work ; and the present is the only production which can be regarded as even 
professing to draw its materials from original sources of information. Calmet's 


own work was composed in a great degree out of the materials already used by 
him in the notes, dissertations, and prefaces of his great work, the Commentaire 
Litterale. The first translation of it appeared in 1732, in three large and costly 
folio volumes, executed by two clergymen, Samuel d'Oyley, M.A., and John 
Colson, M.A., F.B.S., the former of whom translated to the letter M, and the 
other to the end of the book. This translation formed the great treasury 
from which were drawn the materials of the large number of lesser Dictionaries 
of the Bible which subsequently appeared. These exhibited little more diversity 
from each other than such as naturally arises where persons of different habits of 
mind form different abridgments of the same work, the original or new matter 
being chiefly exhibited by the interspersion of doctrinal articles in support of 
the particular views which the compiler entertained. At length a new edition of 
Calmet was undertaken by Mr. Charles Taylor, and appeared in 1 795 in four, and 
in later editions in five, quarto volumes. This was a very eccentric performance, 
composed thus : — two volumes consisted of cm abridgment of Calmet ; one volume 
of engravings ; and two volumes of ' Fragments.' These fragments contained a 
sprinkling of useful matter drawn from histories and travels ; but three-fourths 
of the whole consist of singularly wild and fanciful speculations respecting 
mythology, ethnology, natural history, antiquities, and sundry other matters, 
and are replete, with unsound learning, outrageous etymologies, and the vagaries 
of an undisciplined intellect. Calmet, thus transformed, and containing as 
much of the editor as of the original author, lias in its turn formed the basis 
of the Biblical Dictionaries which have since appeared, including a very pains- 
taking digest of the more useful parts of Taylor's matter incorporated with 
the Dictionary under one alphabet, the whole abridged into one volume 
royal 8vo., which appeared in 1832. This work was in the same year re- 
produced in America under the supervision of Dr. Hobinson, who made some 
few but valuable additions to particular articles. For the sake of these addi- 
tions, reference has in the present work been occasionally made to that edition, 
but more in the early than in the latter part, where the sources of such additions 
were rather sought in the German authorities from which thev were found 
to be derived. This is the sole assistance which has been obtained from 
any edition of Calmet ; and it is so trifling that no notice would have 
been taken of it here, were it not that Calniet's name has been in this 
country so much used in connection with such undertakings, that many readers 
would, without this explanation, be disposed to confound the present work with 
the numerous compilations based upon or made up out of his folios. Of 
Winer's Biblisches Real-wbrterbuch more frequent use lias, in some classes of 
subjects, been made ; but rather as an index than as a direct source of materials ; 
and not to any extent which can impair the claim of this work to be derived 
from original sources of information, rather than from other productions of the 
same description. 

The Editor cannot but regard with peculiar satisfaction the ample refer- 


ences to books which occur in almost every article, and which indicate to the 
reader the means of more extensive inquiry into the various subjects which 
have been noticed with indispensable brevity in this work. The numerous 
references to Scripture will greatly assist its chief use and design — the illus- 
tration of the sacred volume. It is believed that the articles in the depart- 
ments of Biblical Introduction and Criticism embrace a body of informa- 
tion, respecting the books of Scripture and sacred criticism, such as no work 
of the kind in any language has hitherto contained. The Natural, History 
of Scripture has now for the first time been examined, and as far as possible 
settled, not by mere scholars ignorant of natural history, but by naturalists 
of acknowledged eminence. The Scripture Geography has, by the help 
of Dr. Robinson's invaluable Biblical Researches in Palestine, 'Audi of other 
publications less known in this country, assumed in the present work a 
greatly altered and much more distinct aspect. The Archaeological arti- 
cles exhibit an extent of illustration and research which will tend greatly to 
elucidate the obscurities which the subjects necessarily involve. The History 
has been discussed under the influence of those broad principles which con- 
stitute its philosophy ; and in this, as well as in the Biography, it has not 
been forgotten that while actions are always to be judged by the immutable 
standard of right and wrong which the word of God has established, the judg- 
ments which we pass upon men must be qualified by considerations of age, 
country, situation, and other incidental circumstances. 

It is hoped that with such claims to attention, and embodying, as it does, 
the results of great labour and much anxious thought, the work now offered to 
the public will receive indulgent consideration for the minute errors, defects, 
and perhaps discrepancies, from which the Editor dares not hope that it is wholly 
exempt, and which are perhaps inevitable in a work executed by so many 
different hands, and involving so large a body of references, titles, and proper 


Woking, Oct. I5th t 1845. 



s . 


_ ^ 



LJ £ 




UJ fl 


< - ? 


d; uj 


< t 



ic ; 


s ft a 



< OC 


Z i 



CO '— 


< £°2 


3 Cfl 






X ° 



to X 


V) Q. 


f -f 









1 9 

J" 4 







G] iu<4 

7 1 

1 1 







A <\ 

















7 7 




1 1 



O ■ 










ft V 


















> 3 




C apli 





3 3 

5 , Final "] 

> , Final "J 
















53 , Final & 

W, Final & 



1 ) 






5 , Final "| 

5 , Final 1 



AMI tpr 





















a j 

S , Final f) 

£>, Final q 



r r 




2 , Final y 

2 , Final | 



V V 

*P P 





I 5 



i ^ 











if V7 y 









A * 









N 1 SC H 1 











DV a 





A b 
rii 1m 




B s 

r t* 










<F* ma 

4 « 




Da I da 




fl sa 









fl scha 




e o 





4> j< 



i * 

.Ian da 




n k 







"t* [ha 







Tj awi 

T ga 







^ dia 




H Jt 











I) slip 



n n 






tl pha 



p p 







Sim a 


0) wa 








T T 



£ • 






«Jp Y 


r Chain 







4> $ 






P ja 
J? to 
£ Ija 
*? g* 










X X 

UJ a 
q T 











2£ 2^ 





m tsrh. 









A p a 




UJ cy 




8 s 





A to 
e Z a 









8 & 





T f 1 


# Fe 

C a 





AARON (Pl!$, etymology and signification 
unknown ; Sept. ''hap&v), the eldest son of Am- 
iram and Jechebad, of the tribe of Levi, and 
brother of Moses. He was born b.c. 1574 
(Hales, b.c. 1730), three years before Moses, and 
one year before Pharaoh's edict to destroy the 
male children of the Israelites (Exod. v. 20; 
vii. 7). His name first occurs in the mysterious 
interview which Moses had with the Lord, who 
appeared to him in the burning bush, while he 
kept Jethro's Hock in Horeb. Among other ex- 
cuses by which Moses sought to evade the great 
commission of delivering Israel, one was that he 
lacked that persuasive readiness of speech (lite- 
rally was ' not a man of words ') which appeared 
to Mm essential to such an undertaking. But he 
was reminded that his brother Aaron possessed in 
a high degree the endowment which he deemed so 
needful, and could therefore speak in his name 
and on his behalf. During the forty years' ab- 
sence of Moses in the land of Midian, Aaron 
had married a woman of the tribe of Judah, 
named Elisheba (or Elizabeth), who had born 
to him four sons, Nadab, Abihu, Eleazer, and 
Ithamar ; and Eleazer had, before the return of 
Moses, become the father of Phinehas (Exod. 
vi. 23-25). 

Pursuant to an intimation from God, Aaron 
went into the wilderness to meet his long-exiled 
brother, and conduct him back to Egypt. After 
forty years of separation they met and embraced 
each other at the mount of Horeb. When they 
arrived in Goshen, Aaron, who appears to have been 
well known to the chiefs of Israel, introduced his 
brother to them, and assisted him in opening and 
enforcing the great commission which had been 
confided to him. In the subsequent transactions, 
from the first interview with Pharaoh till after 
the delivered nation had passed the Red Sea, 
Aaron appears to have been almost always pre- 
sent with his more illustrious brother, assisting and 
supporting him ; and no separate act of his own 
is recorded. This co-operation was ever after- 
wards maintained. Aaron and Hur were present 
on the bill from which Moses surveyed the battle 
which Joshua fought with the Amalekites ; and 
these two long sustained the weary hands upon 
whose uplifting the fate of the battle was found 
to depend (Exod. xvii. 10-12). Afterwards, when 
Moses ascended Mount Sinai to receive the 
. tables of the law, Aaron, with his sons and 
seventy of the elders,' accompanied him part of 
the way up, and, as a token of the Divine favour, 


were permitted to behold afar off the outskirts of 
that radiant symbol of the Sacred Presence, which 
Moses was allowed to view more nearly (Exod. 
xxiv. 1, 2, 9-11). 

The absence of Moses in the mountain was 
prolonged for forty days, during which the peeple 
seem to have looked upon Aaron as their head, 
and an occasion arose which first brings the 
respective characters of the brothers into real 
comparison, and the result fully vindicates the 
Divine preference of Moses by showing that, 
notwithstanding the seniority and greater elo- 
quence of Aaron, he wanted the high qualities 
which were essential in the leader of the Israel- 
ites, and which were possessed by Moses in >a 
very eminent degree. The people grew impa- 
tient at the protracted stay of their great leader 
in the mountain, and at length concluded that he 
had perished in the devouring fire that gleamed 
upon its top. The result of this hasty conclu- 
sion gives us the first intimation of the extent to 
which their minds were tainted with the rank 
idolatries of Egypt. Recognising the authority of 
their lost chief's brother, they gathered around 
him, and clamorously demanded that, he should 
provide them with a visible symbolic image of 
their God, that they might worship him as other 
gods were worshipped. Either afraid to risk the 
consequences of a refusal, or imperfectly im- 
pressed with the full meaning of the recent and 
authoritative prohibition of all such attempts to 
represent or symbolize the Divine Being, Aaron 
complied with their demand ; and with the 
ornaments of gold which they freely offered, cast 
the figure of a calf [Calf, Golden], being, pro- 
bably, no other than that of the Egyptian god 
Mnevis, whose worsliip prevailed in Lower 
Egypt. However, to fix the meaning of this 
image as a symbol of the true God, Aaron was 
careful to proclaim a feast to Jehovah for the en- 
suing day. On that day the j>eople met to cele- 
brate the feast, after the fashion of the Egyptian 
festivals of the calf-idol, with dancing, with 
shouting, and with sports. 

Meanwhile Moses had been dismissed from die 
mountain, provided with the decalogue, written 
' by the finger of God,' on two tablets of stone. 
These, as soon as he came sufficiently near to 
observe the proceedings in the camp, he cast from 
him with such force that they brake in pieces. 
His re-appearance confounded the multitude, who 
quailed under his stem rebuke, and quietly sub- 
mitted to see their new-made idol destroyed. For 


this sin the population was decimated by sword 
and plague. Aaron, when taxed by his brother 
for his conduct in this matter, attempted to ex- 
cuse himself by casting the whole blame upon 
the people, and pleading the necessity of circum- 
stances (Exod. xxxii.). 

During his long absence in the mountain, 
Moses had received instructions regarding the 
ecclesiastical establishment, the tabernacle [Ta- 
bernacle], and the priesthood [Priests], which 
he soon afterwards proceeded to execute. Under 
the new institution Aaron was to be high-priest, 
and his sons and descendants priests ; and the 
whole tribe to which he belonged, that of Levi, 
was set apart as the sacerdotal or learned caste 
[Levites]. Accordingly, after the tabernacle had 
been completed, and every preparation made for 
the commencement of actual service, Aaron and 
his sons were consecrated by Moses, who anointed 
them with the holy oil and invested them with 
the sacred garments. The high-priest applied him- 
self assiduously to the duties of his exalted office, 
and. during the period of nearly forty years 
that it was filled by him, his name seldom 
comes under our notice. But his elevation was 
soon followed by a most afflictive event. His 
two eldest sons, Nadab and Abihu, were struck 
dead for daring, seemingly when in a state of 
partial inebriety, to conduct the service of God 
in an irregular manner, by offering incense with 
unlawful fire. On this occasion it was enjoined 
that the priests should manifest none of the ordi- 
nary signs of mourning for the loss of those who 
were so dear to them. To this heavy stroke Aaron 
bowed in silence (Lev. x. 1-11). 

Aaron would seem to have been liable to some 
fits of jealousy at the superior influence and au- 
thority of his brother ; for he joined in, or at 
least sanctioned the invidious conduct of his 
sister Miriam [Miriam], who, after the wife of 
Moses had been brought to the camp by Jethro, 
became apprehensive for her own position, and 
cast reflections upon Moses, much calculated to 
damage his influence, on account of his marriage 
with a foreigner — always an odious thing among 
the Hebrews. For this, Miriam was struck with 
temporary leprosy, which brought the high-priest 
to a sense of his sinful conduct, and he sought 
and obtained forgiveness (Num. xii.). 

Some twenty years after (b.c. 1471), when 
the camp was in the wilderness of Paran, a for- 
midable conspiracy was organized against the 
sacerdotal authority exercised by Aaron and his 
sons, and the civil authority exercised by Moses. 
This conspiracy was headed by chiefs of influence 
and station — Korah, of the tribe of Levi, and 
Dathan and Abiram, of the tribe of Reuben [Ko- 
rah]. But the divine appointment was attested 
and confirmed by the signal destruction of the 
conspirators : and the next day, when the people 
assembled tumultuously and murmured loudly at 
the destruction which had overtaken their leaders 
and friends, a fierce pestilence broke out among 
them, and they fell by thousands on the spot. When 
this was seen, Aaron, at the command of Moses, 
tilled a censer with fire from the altar, and, rush- 
ing forward to the point where life had ended and 
death had not begun, he stood there, and the plague 
was stayed where he stood. This was in fact 
another attestation of the Divine appointment; 
and, for its further confimiation, as regarded 


Aaron and his family, the chiefs of the several 
tribes were required to deposit their staves, and 
with them was placed that of Aaron for the tribe 
of Levi. They were all laid up together over 
night in the tabernacle, and in the morning it 
was found that, while the other rods remained as 
they were, that of Aaron had budded, blossomed, 
and yielded the fruit of almonds. The rod was 
preserved in the tabernacle, as an authentic evi- 
dence of the divine appointment of the Aaronic 
family to the priesthood— which, indeed, does not 
appear to have been ever afterwards disputed 
(Num. xvii. 1). 

Aaron was not allowed to enter the Promised 
Land, on account of the distrust which he, as 
well as his brother, manifested when the rock 
was stricken at Meribah (Num. xx. 8-13). His 
death indeed occurred very soon after that event. 
For when the host arrived at Mount Hor, in 
going down the Wady Arabah [Arabah], in 
order to double the mountainous territory of Edom, 
the Divine mandate came that Aaron, accom- 
panied by his brother Moses and by his son 
Eleazer, should ascend to the top of that mountain 
in the view of all the people ; and that he should 
there transfer his pontifical robes to Eleazer, and 
then die. He was 123 years old when his ca- 
reer thus strikingly terminated ; and his son and 
his brother buried him in a cavern of the moun- 
tain [Hor, Mount]. The Israelites mourned 
for him thirty days ; and on the first day of the 
month Ab, the Jews still hold a fast in comme- 
moration of his death. 

AARONITES, the descendants' of Aaron, who 
served as priests at the sanctuary (Num. iv. 5, 
seq. ; 1 Chron. xii. 27; xxvii. 17). 

AB (3iS, father) is found as the first member 
of several compound Hebrew proper names, the 
etymology and meaning of which may be ex- 
plained by a few remarks on the laws of their 
construction. This is the more necessary, as 
Leusden, Hiller, and Simonis, the authors of the 
three most celebrated Onomastica Sacra, as well 
as the many who blindly follow them, indif- 
ferently take the former or latter member of such 
compounds to be in the relation of genitive to 
the other, i. e. consider it equally legitimate to 
say, Abner means father of light, or light of the 
father. Nevertheless, it may be laid down as an 
incontestable canon — being founded not merely 
on an accessory law, but on one of the charac- 
teristic peculiarities of the Syro-Arabian lan- 
guages (that is, on the state construct) — that, in 
all cases in which a compound name consists of 
two nouns, one ofiohich is to be considered in the 
relation of genitive to the other, that one must 
invariably be the latter. Abner, therefore, can 
only mean father of light. 

This error appears to have arisen (besides the 
want of sure principles of construction) from the 
inability to appreciate the metaphorical sense in 
which the Hebrews use the terms father, son, &c. 
The name Abigail, father of jog, appeared in- 
explicable as the name of a icoman ; and there- 
fore those scholars thought it allowable to sacri- 
fice the construction to the necessities of the 
sense. And yet it is not difficult to conceive 
the process by which the idea of a natural father 
became modified into that of author, cause, source 
(as when it is said, ' has the rain a father V Job 


xxxviii. 28) ; nor that, when once the language 
had sanctioned (he use of father as equivalent 
to source, the word might be sometimes treated 
as an abstract, in idea, and be applied without 
gross incongruity to a woman. 

As the Ethiopic, and especially the Arabic 
languages very frequently use father in the sense 
of possessor (as father of 'white, a name for milk), 
some have been disposed to vindicate the same 
privilege to Hebrew also. Thus Gesenius seems 
to have entertained this view, when he rendered 
Abigail by ' pater exultationis, i. e. hilaris,' in his 
Thesaurus. In the German edition of his Ma- 
nual, however, he lias explained it by ' whose 
father is joy.' 1 Into the question as to the prin- 
ciple involved in the latter of his modes of inter- 
pretation, there is no need to enter ; the imme- 
diate object of this article being solely to define 
the relation of the two nouns in a compound 
proper name, when one of them is considered 
dependent as a genitive on the other. 

Very much light yet remains to be thrown on 
compound Hebrew proper names, by a study of 
those of the same class in Arabic. The innume- 
rable compound prcenomina and cognomina 
which the Arabs bestow not only on men, but 
on beasts and inanimate objects, furnish parallels 
to almost every peculiarity observable in Hebrew ; 
and although no example may be found in which 
a woman is called father of joy, .yet the prin- 
ciple of the metaphorical use of terms of rela- 
tionship, as the first element in a name, will re- 
ceive ample illustration, and be brought within 
the reach of our occidental conceptions. (See 
an instructive paper on the Prcenomina of the 
Arabs, by Kosegarterr, in Ewald's Zeitschrift fur 
die Kunde des Morgenlandes, i. 297-317.) — J. N. 

AB (2N ; 'Afipd, Joseph. Antiq: iv. 4 ; the 
Macedonian Awos) is the Chaldee name of that 
month which is the fifth of the ecclesiastical and 
eleventh of the civil year of the Jews. The 
name was first introduced after the Babylonian 
captivity, and does not occur in the Old Testa- 
ment, in which this month is only mentioned by 
its numeral designation as the fifth. It com- 
menced with the new moon of our August (the 
reasons for this statement will be given in the 
article Months), and always had 30 days. This 
month is pre-eminent in the Jewish calendar as 
the period of the most signal national calami- 
ties. The 1st is memorable for the death of 
Aaron (Num. xxxiii. 38). The 9th is the date 
assigned by Moses Cotzensis (cited in Wagen- 
seil's Sola, p. 73G) to the following events : the 
declaration that no one then adult, except 
Joshua and Caleb, should enter into the Pro- 
mised Land (Num. xiv. 30); the destruction 
of the first Temple by Nebuchadnezzar (to 
these first two ' the fast of the fifth month,' in 
Zech. vii. 5 ; viii. 19, is supposed to refer ; yet the 
tract Pesachim, cited in Reland's Antiq. Sacr., 
iv. 10, asserts that the latter was the only 
fast observed during the Captivity) ; the de- 
struction of the second Temple by Titus ; the 
devastation of the city Bettar ("U"V2) ; and the 
slaughter of Ben Cozibah (Bar Cocao), and of 
several thousand Jews there ; and the ploughing 
up of the foundations of the Temple by Tumus 
Kiftus — the two last of which happened in the 
time of Hadrian. 


With regard to the destruction of the first 
Temple, although there is no doubt that the 
Jews commemorate that event by a fast on the 9th 
of Ab, yet the seventh is the date given for it in 
2 Kings xxv. 8 (where, however, the Syriac and 
Arabic versions read the ninth), and the tenth 
that assigned in Jer. lii. 12. Josephus, however, 
in mentioning that the Herodian Temple was 
burnt on the tenth of Lous, expressly asserts that 
it was on the same day of the month on which 
the first Temple was destroyed {Bell. Jud. vi. 4, 5). 
Buxtorf, in his Synttg. Jud. ch. xxx., reconciles 
the discrepancy between the 9th as the day of 
commemoration and the 10th as the date of the 
event, by saying that the conflagration began on 
the former day. Compare also Wagenseil's Hota, 
p. 942. 

In a calendar ascribed to the celebrated as- 
tronomer Rab Ada, who lived in the third cen- 
tury, which Bodenschatz has given in his Kirch- 
liche Verfassung der Juden, ii. 106, the 15th is 
the day appointed for the festival of the tv\o- 
fpdpla, in which the wood for the burnt-offering 
was stored up in the court of the Temple, 1o 
which A T ehemiah alludes in x. 34, and xiii. 31. 
Some place this festival on another day, or even 
month ; or assume, on the authority of the trea- 
tise Taanith, that nine particular families brought 
wood on nine separate days, four of which, 
however, occur in Ab (Otho, Lexicon Rabbin. 
p. 3S0). The election of particular families 
accords with the statement in Nehemiah. Never- 
theless, Josejihus, speaking of this festival, says, 
4v fi ■ko.o'iv e&os v\vv -Kpo(r<pipei.v {Bell. Jud. ii. 17) ; 
and the date of the day succeeding it, which he 
mentions in the next section, fixes its celebra- 
tion, in his time, on the 14th of the month. It 
is, however, extremely difficult to distinguish the 
original from the later forms in any rite of a 
people so prone to multiply its ceremonial ob- 
servances as the Jews were. 

Lastly, the Megillat Taanith states that the 
18th is a fast in memory of the western lamp 
going out in the Temple in the time of Ahaz. 
It may be conjectured that this refers to the ex- 
tinction of ' the lamps ' which is mentioned in 
2 Chron. xxix. 7, as a part of Ahaz's attempts to 
suppress the Temple service. For an inquiry 
into what is meant by the loestern or evening 
lamp, see the article Candlestick. — J. N. 

ABADDON, or Apoli.yon (}n3^, destruc- 
tion; 'AfiadSibi/ in Rev. ix. 11, where it is ren- 
dered by the Greek 'AttoXAvcci/, destroyer). The 
former is the Hebrew name, and the latter the 
Greek, for the angel of death, described (Rev. 
ix. 11) as the king and chief of the Apocalyptic 
locusts under the fifth trumpet, and as the angel 
of the abyss or ' bottomless pit.' This personifi- 
cation is peculiar to (he present text. In the Bible, 
and in every Rabbinical instance that occurs to us, 
the word piUN {abaddon) means destruction 
(Job xxxi. 12). or the place of destruction, i.e. 
the subterranean world, Hades, the region of the 
dead (Job xxvi. ; xxviii. 22 ; Prov. xv. 11). It 
is in fact the second of the seven names which 
the Rabbins apply to that region ; and they de- 
duce it particularly from Ps. lxxxviii. 11. 'Shall 
thy loving kindness be declared in the grave, 
or thy faithfulness in (abandon) destruction*' 




ABANA, or Amana (.rmN* or n!l»N ; the 
former being the hethib or Hebrew text, and 
the latter the keri or marginal reading; Sept. 
'A/3aj/a,), the name of one of the rivers which are 
mentioned by Naaman ("2 Kings v. 12), 'Abana 
and Pharpar,' as ' rivers of Damascus. 1 Amana 
signifies ' perennial,' and is probably the true 
name, the permutation of b and m being very 
common in the Oriental dialects. It is eas)r to 
find ' rivers of Damascus ;' but there is a diffi- 
culty in appropriating the distinctive names 
which are here applied to them. The main stream 
by which Damascus is now irrigated is called 
Barrada. This river, the Chrysorrhoas, or ' golden 
stream,' of the ancient geographers, as soon as it 
issues from a cleft of the Anti-Lebanon moun- 
tains, is immediately divided into three smaller 
courses. The central or principal stream runs 
straight towards the city, and there supplies the 
different public cisterns, baths, and fountains ; 
the. other branches diverge to the right and left 
along the rising ground on either hand, and having 
furnished the means of extensive irrigation, fall 
again into the main channel, after diffusing their 
fertilizing influences, without which the whole 
would be an arid desert, like the vast surrounding 
plains. In those plains the soil is in some parts 
even finer than here, but barren from the want 
of water. The main stream and its subsidiaries 
unite in greatly weakened force beyond the town 
on the south-east ; and the collected waters, after 
flowing for two or three hours through the eastern 
hills, are at length lost in a marsh or lake, 
which is known as the Bah?' el Merdj, or Lake 
of the Meadow. Dr. Richardson {Travels, ii. 499) 
states that the ' water of the Barrada, like the 
water of the Jordan, is of a white sulphureous hue, 
and an unpleasant taste.' At the present day it 
seems scarcely possible to appropriate with cer- 
tainty the Scriptural names to these streams. There 
is indeed a resemblance of name which would 
suggest the Barrada to be the Pharpar, and then 
the question would be, which of the other streams 
is the Abana. But some contend that the Barrada 
is the Abana, and are only at a loss for the Pharpar. 
Others find both in the two subsidiary streams, 
and neglect the Barrada. The most recent con- 
jecture seeks the Abana in the small river Fidgi 
or Fijih, which Dr. Richardson describes as rising 
near a village of the same name in a pleasant 
valley fifteen or twenty miles to the north-west of 
Damascus. It issues from the limestone rock, in 
a deep, rapid stream, about thirty feet wide. It 
is pure and cold as iced water; and, after coursing 
down a stony and rugged channel for above a hun- 
dred yards, falls into the Barrada, which comes 
from another valley, and at the point of junction 
is only half as wide as the Fijih. Dr. Mansford 
{Script. Gaz. in Abana), who adopts the notion 
that the Abana was one of the subsidiary streams, 
well remarks that ' Naaman may be excused his 
national prejudice in favour of his own rivers, 
which, by their constant and beautiful supply, 
render the vicinity of Damascus, although on the 
edge of a desert, one of the most beautiful spots 
in the world ; while the streams of Judaea, with 
the exception of the Jordan, are nearly dry the 
greater part of the year, and, running in deep 
and rocky channels, convey but partial fertility 
to the lands through which they flow.' 

ABARIM (Qnny.; Sept. 'AQapl/j.), a moun- 
tain (DHjyiTin), or rather chain of moun- 
tains (D'Hiyn-'nn) which form or belong to 
the mountainous district east of the Dead Sea and 
the lower Jordan. It presents many distinct 
masses and elevations, commanding extensive 
views of the country west of the river (Irby and 
Mangles, p. 459). From one of the highest of these, 
called Mount Nebo, Moses surveyed the Promised 
Land before he died. From the manner in which 
the names Abarim, Nebo, and Pisgah are connected 
(Deut. xxxii. 49, ' Get thee ujj into this mountain 
Abarim, unto Mount Nebo ;' and xxxiv. 1, 'Unto 
the mountain of Nebo, to the top of Pisgah'), it 
would seem that Nebo was a mountain of the 
Abarim chain, and that Pisgah was the highest 
and most commanding peak of that mountain. 
The loftiest mountain of the neighbourhood is 
Mount Attarous, about ten miles north of the 
Amon ; and travellers have been disposed to iden- 
tify it with Mount Nebo. It is represented as 
barren, its summit being marked by a wild pis- 
tachio-tree overshadowing a heap of stones. The 
precise appropriation of the three names, however, 
remains to be determined, as this locality has not 
yet (1S43) had the advantage of such searching 
exploration as Professor Robinson has applied to 
Western Palestine. 

[Cucurbita citrullus.] 

ABATTACHIM (D^HESn^? ; Sept. alicvos). 
This word occurs only in Numbers xi. 5, where 
the murmuring Israelites say, ' We remember the 
fish which we did eat freely in Egypt, the cucum- 
bers and the abattachim,' 1 &c. The last word 
has always been rendered ' Melons.' The pro- 
bable correctness of this translation may be 
inferred from melons having been known to the 
nations of antiquity ; and it may be proved to 
be so, by comparing the original term with the 
name of the melon in a cognate language such 
as the Arabic. 

The cucurbitacese, or gourd tribe, are remark- 
able for their power of adapting themselves 
to the different situations where they can be 
grown. Thus Mr. Elphinstone describes some 
of them as yielding large and juicy fruit in the 
midst of the Indian desert, where water is 300 
feet from the surface. Extreme of moisture, how- 
ever, is far from injurious to them, as the great 
majority are successfully cultivated in the rainy 
season in India. Mr. Moorcroft describes an ex- 


tensive cultivation of melons and cucumbers on 
the beds of weeds which float on the lakes of 
Cashmere. They are similarly cultivated in 
Persia and in China. In India, ' some of the 
species may be seen in the most arid places, 
others in the densest jungles. Planted at the 
foot of a tree, they emulate the vine in ascend- 
ing its branches ; and near a hut, they soon cover 
its thatch with a coating of green. They form a 
principal portion of the culture of Indian gar- 
dens : the farmer even rears them in the neigh- 
bourhood of his wells' (Royle, Himalay un Botany, 
p. 218). 

These plants, though known to the Greeks, are 
not natives of Europe, but of Eastern countries, 
whence they must have been introduced into 
Greece. They probably may be traced to Syria 
or Egypt, whence other cultivated plants, as well 
as civilization, have travelled westwards. In 
Egypt they formed a portion of the food of the 
people at the very early period when the Israel- 
ites were led by Moses from its rich cultivation 
into the midst of the desert. The melon, the 
water-melon, and several others of the Cucurbi- 
tacese, are mentioned by Wilkinson (Thebes, 
p. 212 ; Ancient Egyptians, iv. 62), as still cul- 
tivated there, and are described as being sown in 
the middle of December, and cut, the melons in 
ninety and the cucumbers in sixty days. 

If we consider that the occurrences so graphi- 
cally detailed in the Bible took place in the 
East, we should expect, among the natural pro- 
ducts noticed, that those which appear from the 
earliest times to have been esteemed in these 
countries would be those mentioned. But as 
all are apt to undervalue the good which they 
possess, and think of it only when beyond their 
reach, so the Israelites in the desert longed for 
the delicious coolness of the melons of Egypt. 
Among these we may suppose both the melon 
and water-melon to have been included, and 
therefore both will be treated of in this article. 

By the term Abattachim there is little doubt 
that melons are intended, as, when we remove 
the plural form im, we have a word very similar 

to the Arabic t-.Ut Butikh, which is the name 

of the melon in that language. This appears, 
however, to be a generic term, inasmuch as they 
employ it simply to .indicate the common or 
musk melon, while the water-melon is called 
Butikh-hindee, or Indian melon. The former is 
called in Persian kliurpoozeh, and in Hindee 
khurbooja. It is probably a native of the 
Persian region, whence it has been carried 
south into India, and north into Europe, the 
Indian being a slight corruption of the Persian 
name. As the Arabian authors append fufash as 
the Greek name of butikh, which is considered 
to be the melon, it is evident that fufash 
must, in their estimation, be the same. From 
there being no p in Arabic, and as the diacritical 
point noon might, by transcribers, have easily 
been mistaken for that of shen, it is more than 
probable that this is intended for iriirtav, espe- 
cially if we compare the description inAvicenna 
with that in Dioscorides. By Galen it was called 
Melopepo, from melo and pcpo, the former from 
being roundish in form like the apple. The 
melon is supposed to have been the (tikvos of 
Theophrastus, and the ainvos ireirwy of Hippo- 



crates. It was known to the Romans, and culti- 
vated by Columella, with the assistance of some 
precaution at cold times of the year. It is said 
to have been introduced into this country about 
the year 1520, and was called musk-melon to 
distinguish it from the pumpkin, which was 
usually called melon. 

The melon, being thus a native of warm cli- 
mates, is necessarily tender in those of Europe, but, 
being an annual, it is successfully cultivated by 
gardeners with the aid of glass and artificial 
heat of about 75° to 80°. The fruit of the melon 
may be seen in great variety, whether with respect 
to the colour of its rind or of its flesh, its taste or 
its odour, and also its external form and size. 
The flesh is soft and succulent, of a white, yel- 
lowish, or reddish hue, of a sweet and pleasant 
taste, of an agreeable, sometimes musk-like odour, 
and forms one of the most delicious of traits, 
which, when taken in moderation, is wholesome, 
but, like all other fruits of a similar kind, is 
liable to cause indigestion and diarrhoea when 
eaten in excess, especially by those unaccustomed 
to its use. 

All travellers in Eastern countries have borne 
testimony to the refreshment and delight they 
have experienced from the fruit of the melon. 
But we shall content ourselves with referring to 
Alpinus, who, having paid particular attention to 
such subjects, says of the Egyptians, 'Fractious, 
&c. se replent, ut ex iis solis saepe coenam, vel 
prandium perficiant, cujusmodi sunt precocia, 
cucurbitse, pepones, melopepones ; quorum quidetn 
nomen genericum est Batech' (Iterum JEgypt. 
Hist. 1. 17). He also describes in tiie same 
chapter the kindof melon called Abdellavi, which, 
according to De Sacy, receives its name from 
having been introduced by Abdullah, a governor 
of Egypt under the Khalif Al Mamoon. It may 
be a distinct species, as the fruit is oblong, 
tapering at both ends, but thick in the middle ; 
a figure (tab. xli.) is given in his work Da 
Plantis JEgypti ; but Forskal applies this name 
also to the Chate, which is ' separately described 
by Alpinus, and a figure given by him at 
tab. xl. 

The Cucumis Chate is a villous plant with 
trailing stems, leaves roundish, bluntly angled, 
and toothed; the fruit pilose, elliptic, and tapering 
to both ends. ' Horum usum corporibus in cibo 
ipsis turn crudis, turn coctis vescentibus, salubrem 
esse ajjud omnes eoram locorum incolas credi- 
tor' (Alpin. I. c. p. 51). Hasselquist calls this the 
'Egyptian melon' and 'queen of cucumbers,' and 
says that it grows only in the fertile soil round 
Cairo; that the fruit is a little watery, and the 
flesh almost of the same substance as that of die 
melon, sweet and cool. ' This the grandees and 
Europeans in Egypt eat as the most, pleasant 
fruit they find, anil that from which they have 
the least, to apprehend. It is the most excellent 
fruit of this tribe of any yet known' (Hassel- 
quist, Travels, p. 258). Forskal, uniting the 
Abdellavi and Chate into one species, says it is 
the commonest of all fruits in Egypt and is 
cultivated in all their fields, and many 
prepare from it a very grateful drink {Flora 
JEgyptiaco-Arabica, p. 1CS). 

With the melon it is necessary to notice the 
Wafer-Melon, which is generally supposed t.> bo 
specially indicated by the term Battich. But 



this it would be difficult to determine in the 
affirmative in a family like the cucurbitaceEe, 
where there are so many plants like each other, 
both in their herbage and fruit. In the first 
place, the term Battich is rather generic than 
specific, and, therefore, if Abattachim were simi- 
larly employed, it might include the water- 
melon, but not to the exclusion of the others. 
In the second place, it is doubtful whether the 
water-melon was introduced into Egypt at a very 
early period, as we find no distinct mention of 
it in Greek writers. It is now common in all 
parts of Asia. It seems to have been first dis- 
tinctly mentioned by Serapion under the name 
of Dullaha, which in the Latin translation is 
interpreted, ' id est melo magnus viridis ;' and 
Sethio is quoted as the earliest author who ap 
plies the term ' Ayyovpwv to the water-melon, as 
has subsequently been frequently the case, though 
it is often distinguished as Anguria indica. Sera- 
pion, however, quotes Bhases, Meseha, and Ish- 
mahelita. In the Persian books referred to in a 
Note, the author finds Battich hindee given as 
the Arabic of turbooz, which is the name as- 
signed in India to the water-melon. So Alpinus, 
speaking of the anguria in Egypt, says, ' vulgo 
Batech el Maovi (water), et in Scriptoribus 
Medicis Batech-Indi vel Anguria indica dicitur.' 
One of the Persian names is stated to be hin- 
duaneh. It may be indigenous to India, but it is 
difficult, in the case of this as of other long-culti- 
vated plants, to ascertain its native country with 
certainty. For, even when we find such a plant 
apparently wild, we are not sure that the seed 
has not escaped from cultivation ; and at pre- 
sent we know that the water-melon is cultivated 
in all parts of Asia, in the north of Africa, and 
in the south of Europe. 

The water-melon is clearly distinguished by 
Alpinus as cultivated in Egypt, and called by 
the above names, ' quse intus semina tantum, et 
aquam dulcissimam continent.' It is mentioned 
by Forskal, and its properties described by 
Hasselquist. Though resembling the other kinds 
very considerably in its properties, it is very 
different from them in its deeply-cut leaves, 
from which it is compared to a very different 
plant of this tribe — that is, the colocynth. 
' Citrullus folio colocynthidis secto semine nigro.' 
A few others have' cut leaves, but the water- 
melon is so distinguished among the edible 
species. The plant is hairy, with trailing cirrhi- 
ferous stems. The pulp abounds so much in 
watery juice, that it will run out by a hole made 
through the rind; and it is from this peculiarity 
that it has obtained the names of water-melon, 
melon d'eau, wasser-melon. Hasselquist says 
that it is cultivated on the banks of the Nile, in 
the rich clayey earth which subsides during the 
inundation, and serves ' the Egyptians for meat, 
drink, and physic. It is eaten in abundance, 
during the season, even by the richer sort of 
people ; but the common people, on whom Pro- 
vidence hath bestowed nothing but poverty and 
patience, scarcely eat anything but these, and 
account this the best time of the year, as they 
are obliged to put up with worse at other seasons 
of the year' (Travels, p. 256).— J. F. R. 

%.* In concluding the first article in this work 
on the botany of the Bible, the author thinks 
it desirable to state the mode in which he has 


studied the subject, and the grounds upon which 
he has formed his opinions, whether they agree 
with or differ from those of previous writers. He 
has already related, in his ' Essay on the Anti- 
quity of Hindoo Medicine,' that his attention 
was first directed to the identification of the 
natural products mentioned in ancient authors, 
in consequence of being requested by the Me- 
dical Board of Bengal to investigate the medi- 
cinal plants and drugs of India, for the purpose 
of ascertaining how far the public service might 
be supplied witli medicines grown in India, in- 
stead of importing them nearly all from foreign 
countries. In effecting this important object, 
his first endeavour was to make himself ac- 
quainted with the different drugs which the na- 
tives of India are themselves in the habit of 
employing as medicines. For this purpose he 
had to examine the things themselves, as well 
as to ascertain the names by which they were 
known. He therefore directed specimens of every 
article in the bazars to be brought to him, whether 
found wild in the country or the produce of 
culture — whether the result' of home manufac- 
ture or of foreign commerce — whether of the ani- 
mal, vegetable, or mineral kingdom. — whether 
useful as food or as medicine, or employed 
in any of the numerous arts which minister to 
the wants or comforts of man. In order to 
acquire a knowledge of their names, he caused the 
native works on Materia Medica to be collated 
by competent hakeems and moonshees, and the 
several articles arranged under the three heads 
of the animal, vegetable, and mineral kingdoms. 
The works collated were chiefly the £ Mukhzun- 
al-Udwieh,' ' Tohfat-al-Moomeneen, 1 ' Ihtiarat 
Buddie,' and ' Taleef Shereef,' all of them in 
Persian, but consisting principally of translations 
from Arabic authors. These were themselves 
indebted for much of their information respect- 
ing drugs to Dioscorides ; but to his descrip- 
tions the Persians have fortunately appended the 
Asiatic synonymes, and references to some Indian 
products not mentioned in the works of the Arabs. 
The author himself made a catalogue of the 
whole, in which, after the most usually received, 
that is, the Arabic name, the several synonymes 
in Persian, Hindee, &c, as well as in metamor- 
phosed Greek, were inserted. He traced the 
articles as much as possible to the plants, 
animals, and countries whence they were derived ; 
and attached to them their natural history names, 
whenever he was successful in ascertaining them. 
Being without any suitable library for such 
investigations, and being only able to obtain a 
small copy of Dioscorides, he was in most cases 
obliged to depend upon himself for the identi- 
fication of the several substances. The results 
of several of these investigations are briefly re- 
corded in his observations on the history and 
uses of the different natural families of plants, in 
his ' Illustrations of the Botany of the Hima- 
layan Mountains.' The author also made use of 
these materials in his ' Essay on the Antiquity 
of Hindoo Medicine,' in tracing different Indian 
products from the works of the Arabs into those 
of the Greeks, even up to the time of Hippocrates. 
He inferred that tropical products could only 
travel from south to north, and that the Hindoos 
must have ascertained their properties, and used 
them as medicines, before they became sum- 


ciently famous to be observed and recorded by 
the Greeks. Having thus traced many of these 
Eastern products to the works of almost con- 
temporary authors, he was led to conclude that 
many of them must be the same as those men- 
tioned in the Bible, especially as there is often 
considerable resemblance between their Arabic 
and Hebrew names '^Essay, p. 138). 

Although, like Hasselquist, Alpinus, Forskal, 
and others, the author studied these subjects in 
Eastern countries, yet he differs from them all in 
the circumstances under which he pursued his in- 
quiries. His investigations were carried on while 
he was resident in the remotest of the Eastern 
nations known in early times, who were probably 
among the first civilized, and who are still not 
only acquainted with the various drugs and their 
names, but possess an ancient literature, in which 
many of these very substances are named and 
arranged. Having obtained the drags, heard 
their names applied by the natives, read their 
descriptions, and traced them to their plants, he 
formed many of his opinions from independent 
sources. It may therefore be considered a strong 
confirmation of the correctness of his results when 
they agree with those of previous inquirers ; when 
they differ, it must be ascribed to the peculiar pro- 
cess by which they have been obtained. — J . F. R. 

[Cucumis melo.] 

ABBA QAPfta, N2N) is the Hebrew word 
US, father, under a form peculiar to the Chaldee 
idiom. The Aramaic dialects do not possess the 
definite article in the form in which it is found 
in Hebrew. They compensate for it by adding 
a syllable to the end of the simple noun, and 
thereby produce a distinct form, called by gram- 
marians the emphatic, or definitive, which is 
equivalent (but with much less strictness in its 
use, especially in Syriac) to a noun with the 
article in Hebrew. This emphatic form is also 
commonly used to express the vocative case of 
our language — the context alone determining 
when it is to be taken in that sense (just as the 
noun with the article is sometimes similarly used 
in Hebrew). Hence this form is appropriately 
employed in all the passages in which it occurs 
in the New Testament (Mark xiv. 30; Rom. viii. 
15; Gal. iv. 6) : in all of which it is an invoca- 
tion. Why Abba is, in all these passages, im- 
mediately rendered by d-irar-lip, instead of irdrep, 


may perhaps be in part accounted for on the 
supposition that, although the Hellenic (as well 
as the classical) Greek allows the use of the 
nominative with the article for the vocative 
(Winer, Gram, des Neutest. Sprach. 6 29), the 
writers of the New Testament preferred the 
former, because the article more adequately re- 
presented the force of the emphatiG form. 

It is also to be observed that, in the usage of 
the Targums, N2S, even when it is the sub- 
ject of an ordinary proposition, may mean my 
father; and that the absolute form of the word is 
not used with the suffix of the first person sin- 
gular. Lightfoot has endeavoured (Horce Hebr. 
ad Marc. xiv. 36) to show that there is an 
important difference between the Hebrew 2K 
and the Chaldee 5QS : that whereas the former 
is used for all senses of father, both strict and me- 
taphorical, the latter is confined to the sense of a 
natural or adoptive father. This statement, which 
is perhaps not entirely free from a doctrinal bias, 
is not strictly correct. At least the Targums have 
rendered the Hebrew father by JON, in Gen. 
xiv. 8, and Job xxxviii. 28, where the use of 
the term is clearly metaphorical; and, in later 
times, the Talmudical writers (according to 
Buxtorf, Lex. Talm.) certainly employ &ON to 
express rabbi, master — a usage to which he thinks 
reference is made in Matt, xxiii. 9. — J. N. 

ABBREVIATIONS. As there are satisfactory 
grounds for believing that the word Selah, in the 
Psalms, is not an anagram, the earliest positive 
evidence of the use of abbreviations by the Jews 
occurs in some of the inscriptions on the coins 
of Simon the Maccabee. Some of these, namely, 
have E>» for 7N1Ei^' r , and "in for niin ; and some 
of those of the first and second years have S 
and 2&; the former of which is considered to 
be a numeral letter, and the latter an abbre- 
viation for 2 fiJfcy, anno II. (Bayer, De Numis 
HebrcBo-Samaritanis, p. 171). It is to be ob- 
served, however, that both these latter abbrevia- 
tions alternate on other equallv genuine coins, 
with the full legends finN n.3^ and TP7W T\y&; 
and that the coins of the third and fourth years 
invariably express both the year and the numeral 
in icords at length. 

The earliest incontestable evidence of the use 
of abbreviations in the copies of the Old Testa- 
ment is founc in some few extant MSS., in 
which common words, not liable to be mistaken, 
are curtailed of one or more letters at the 

end. Thus ^E5>* is written for ?N")EJN ; and the 

phrase HDn D?iy7 'O, so frequently recurring 

' I* I 
in Ps. cxxxvi., is in some MSS. written PI ? D. 

Yet even this licence, which is rarely used, is 
always denoted by the sign of abbreviation, an 
oblique stroke on the last letter, and is gene- 
rally confined to the end of a line; and as all 
the MSS. extant (with hardly two exceptions) 
are .later than the tenth century, when (he Rab- 
binical mode of abbreviation had been so long 
established and was earned to such an extent, 
the infrequency and limitation of the licence, 
under such circumstances, might be considered 
to favour the belief that it was not more freely 
employed in earlier times. 

Nevertheless, some learned men have endea- 
voured to prove that abbreviations must have 



been used in the MSS. of the sacred text which 
were written before the Alexandrian version was 
made ; and they find the grounds of this opinion 
in the existence of several Masoretic various lec- 
tions in the Hebrew text itself, as well as in the 
several discrepancies between it and the ancient 
versions, which may be plausibly accounted for 
on that assumption. This theory supposes that 
both the copyists who resolved the abbreviations 
(which it is assumed existed in the ancient He- 
brew MSS. prior to the LXX.) into the entire 
full text which we now possess, and the early 
translators who used such abbreviated copies, 
were severally liable to error in their solutions. 
To illustrate the application of this theory to the 
Masoretic readings, Eichhom (Einleit. ins A. T. 
i.. 323) cites, among other passages, Jos. viii. 16, 
in which the Kethib is "PS?, and the Keri 1J?; 
and 2 Sam. xxiii. 20, in which TI is the Kethib, 
and TTi the Keri. With regard to the ver- 
sions, Drusius suggests that the reason why the 
LXX. rendered the words (Jon. i. 9) '2JN 
*13j, by dov\os Kvpiov eifil, was because they 
mistook the Resh for Daleth, and believed the 
Jod to be an abbreviation of Jehovah, as if it had 
been originally written ''HIJJ (Qucest. Ebraic. 
iii. 6). An example of the converse is cited 
from Jer. vi. 11, where our text has niiT DDD, 
which the LXX. has rendered 6vjx6v /jlov, as if 
the original form had been 'TlDfl, and they had 
considered the Jod to be a suffix, whereas the 
later Hebrew copyists took it for an abbreviation 
of the sacred name. Kennicott"s three Disserta- 
tions contain many similar conjectures ; and 
Stark's Davidis aliorumque Carminiim Libri V. 
has a collection of examples out of the ancient 
versions, in which he thinks he traces false solu- 
tions of abbreviations. 

In like manner some have endeavoured to ac- 
count for the discrepancies in statements of 
numbers in parallel passages and in the ancient 
versions, by assuming that numbers were not ex- 
pressed in the early MSS. by entire words (as 
they invariably are in our present, text), but by 
some kind of abbreviation. Ludolf, in his Com- 
mentar. ad Hist. JEthiop. p. 85, has suggested 
that numeral letters may have been -mistaken for 
the initial letter, and, consequently, for the ab- 
breviation of a numeral word, giving as a perti- 
nent example the case of the Roman V being 
mistaken for Viginti. He also thinks the con- 
verse to have been possible. Most later scholars, 
however, are divided between the alternative of 
letters or of arithmetical cyphers analogous to 
our figures. The last was the idea Cappellus 
entertained (Critica Sacra, i. 10), although De 
Vignoles appears to have first worked out the 
theory in detail in his Chronologic de VHistoire 
Semite: whereas Scaliger (cited in Walton's Pro- 
legomena, vii. 14) and almost all modem critics 
are in favour of letters. Kennicott has treated 
the subject at some length ; but the best work 
on it is that of J. M. Faber, entitled Literas 
olim pro vocibus in numerando a. scriptoribus 
V. T. esse adhibitas, Onoldi, 1775, 4to. 

It is undeniable that it is much easier to ex- 
plain the discordant statements which are found, 
for instance, in the parallel numbers of the 2nd 
chapter of Ezra and the 7th of Nehemiah, by 
having recourse to either of these suppositions, 


than it is to conceive how such very dissimilar 
signs and sounds, as the entire names of the 
Hebrew numerals are, could be so repeatedly 
confounded as they appear to have been. This 
adequacy of the theory to account for the phe- 
nomena constitutes the internal argument for its 
admission. Gesenius has also, in his Geschichte 
der Hebriiischen Sprache, p. 173, adduced the 
following external grounds for its adoption : 
the fact that both, letters and numeral notes are 
found in other languages of the Syro-Arabian 
family, so that neither is altogether alien to their 
genius ; letters, namely, in Syriac, Arabic, and 
later Hebrew ; numeral figures on the Phoenician 
coins and Palmyrene inscriptions (those em- 
ployed by the Arabs and transmitted through 
them to us are, it is well known, of Indian 
origin). And although particular instances are 
more easily explained on the one supposition 
than on the other, yet he considers that analogy, 
as well as the majority of examples, favours the 
belief that the numerals were expressed, in . the 
ancient copies, by letters ; that they were then 
liable to frequent confusion ; and that they were 
finally written out at length in words, as in our 
present text- 
There is an easy transition from these abbre- 
viations to those of the later Hebrew, or Rabbi- 
nical writers, which are nothing more than a 
very extended use and development of the same 
principles of stenography. Rabbinical abbre- 
viations, as defined by Danz, in his valuable 
Rabbinisnms Enucleatus, § 65, are either perfect, 
when the initial letters only of several words are 
written together, and a double mark is placed 
between such a group of letters, as in DD//K, 
the common abbreviation of the Hebrew names 
of the books of Job, Proverbs, and Psalms (the 
last letters only of words are also written in 
Cabbalistical abbreviations) ; or imperfect, where 
more than one letter of a single word is written, 
and a single mark is placed at. the end to denote 
the mutilation, as n5J>' for ?tOEy\ The per- 
fect abbreviations are called by the Rabbinical 
writers JTQT1 ''K'K"), i. e. capitals of words. 
When proper names, as frequently happens, are 
abbreviated in this manner, it is usual to form 
the mass of consonants into proper syllables by 
means of the vowel Patacli, and to consider Jod, 
and Vau as representatives of I and U. Thus 
D2"£n, Rambam, the abbreviation of ' Rabbi 
Mosheh ben Maimon, 1 and ""tin, Rashi, that of 
' Rabbi Shelomoh Jarchi,' are apposite illustra- 
tions of this method of contraction. Some ac- 
quaintance with the Rabbinical abbreviations is 
necessary to understand the Masoretic notes in 
the margin of the ordinary editions of the He- 
brew text; and a considerable familiarity with 
them is essential to those who wish, with ease 
and profit, to consult the Talmud and Jewish 
commentators. The elder Buxtorf wrote a valu- 
able treatise on these abbreviations, under the 
title De Abbreviaturis Hebraicis, which has 
often been reprinted ; but, from the inexhaustible 
nature of the subject, O. G. Tychsen added two 
valuable supplements, in 176S, and Selig incor- 
porated them with his own researches in his 
Compendia vocum Hebraico-Rabbi?iicarum, Lips. 
17S0, which is the cornpletest work of the kind 

With regard to the abbreviations in the MSS. 


of the New Testament, it may be observed that 
they have furnished little matter for critical in- 
quiry. Those that exist are almost exclusively 
confined to common and easily supplied words, 
e. g. God, Lord, father, son, &c. ; or to the ter- 
minations of formation and inflexion, in which 
case they fall more properly under the province 
of general Greek Palaeography. They very 
rarely furnish any hint of the mode in which a 
various reading has arisen, as has been suggested, 
for instance, in the case of Kaipw and Kvpico in 
Romans xii. 11. The use of letters for nume- 
rals, however, according to Eichhom's Einleit. 
ins N. T., iv. 199, is not only found in some 
MSS. now extant, but, in the instance of the 
number 666, in Rev. xiii. 18, can be traced up 
lo the time of the apostles ; partly on the testi- 
mony of Irenseus, and partly because those MSS. 
which wrote the number out in words differ in 
the gender of the first word, some writing e^anS- 
(Tioi, some k^aicSffiui, some k^aKocna. The early 
fathers have also unhesitatingly availed them- 
selves of the theory that numbers were originally 
denoted by letters, whenever they wished to ex- 
plain a difficulty in numbers. Thus Severus of 
Antioch (cited by Theophylact) accounts for the 
difference of the hour of our Lord's crucifixion, 
as stated in Mark xv. 25, and John xix. 14, by 
the mistake of y (3) for s (6). Eichhorn has 
given a lithographed table of the most usual ab- 
breviations in the MSS. of the New Testament. 

Lastly, the abbreviations by which Origen, in 
nis ' Hexapla,' cites the Septuagint and other 
Greek versions, deserve some notice. The nature 
of this work rendered a compendious mode of 
reference necessary ; and, accordingly, numeral 
letters and initials -are the chief exrjedients em- 
ployed. A large list of them may be seen in 
Montfaucon's edition of the 'Hexapla;' and 
Eichhorn (Einleit. ins A. T. i. 548-50) has given 
those which are most important. — J. N. 

1. ABDON (j'my, a servant; Sept. 'A$Mv), 
the son of Hill el, of the tribe of Ephraim, and 
tenth judge of Israel. He succeeded Elon, and 
judged Israel eight years. His administration 
appears to have been peaceful ; for nothing is 
recorded of him but that he had forty sons and 
thirty nephews, who rode on young asses — a mark 
of their consequence (Judg. xii. 13-15). Abdon 
died b.c. 1112. 

There were three other persons of this name, 
which appears to have been rather common. They 
are mentioned in 1 Chron. viii. 29; ix. 36; 
xxxiv. 20. 

2. ABDON, a city of the tribe of Asher, which 
•was given to the Levites of Gershom's family (Job 
xxi. 30 ; 1 Chron. vi. 74). 

ABEDNEGO (i^raj?, servant of Nego, i.e. 
Nebo ; Sept. 'Afidevayu), the Chaldee name im- 
posed by the king of Babylon's officer upon 
Azariah, one of the tluee companions of Daniel. 
With his two friends, Shadrach and Meshach, 
he was miraculously delivered from the burning 
furnace, into which they were cast for refusing 
to worship the golden statue which Nebuchad- 
nezzar had caused to be set up in the plain of 
Dura (Dan. hi.). 

ABEL (?3n ;. Sept. "Ay8eA), properly Hebel, 
the second son of Adam, who was slain by Cain, 



his elder brother (Gen. iv. 1-16). The circum- 
stances of that mysterious transaction are con- 
sidered elsewhere [Cain]. To the name Abel 
a twofold interpretation has been given. Its 
primaiy .signification is weakness or vanity, as 
the word PHH, from which it is derived, indi- 
cates. By another rendering it signifies grief 
or lamentation, both meanings being justified by 
the Scripture narrative. Cain (a possession*) 
was so named to indicate both the joy of his 
mother and his right to the inheritance of the 
first-born : Abel received a name indicative of 
his weakness and poverty when compared with 
the supposed glory of his brother's destiny, and 
prophetically of the pain and sorrow which were 
to be inflicted on him and his parents. 

Ancient writers abound in observations on the 
mystical character of Abel ; and he is spoken of 
as the representative of the pastoral tribes, while 
Cain is regarded as the author of the nomadic 
life and character. St. Chrysostom calls him the 
Lamb of Christ, since he suffered the most griev- 
ous injuries solely on account of his innocency 
(Ad Stagir. ii. 5) ; and he directs particular 
attention to the mode in which Scripture speaks 
of his offerings, consisting of the best of his 
flock, ' and of the fat thereof,' while it seems to 
intimate that Cain presented the fruit which might 
be most easily procured (Horn, in Gen. xviii. 5). 
St. Augustin, speaking of regeneration, alludes 
to Abel as representing the new or spiritual man 
in contradistinction to the natural or corrupt man, 
and says, ' Cain founded a city on earthy but 
Abel as a stranger and pilgrim looked forward 
to the city of the saints which is in heaven ' 
(De Civitate Dei, xv. i.). Abel, he says in 
another place, was the first-fruits of the Church, 
and was sacrificed in testimony of the future 
Mediator. And on Ps. cxviii. (Serm. xxx. sec. 9) 
he says : ' this city' (that is, ' the city of God') 
'has its beginning from Abel, as the wicked city 
from Cain.' Irenseus says that God, in the case 
of Abel, subjected the just to the unjust, that the 
righteousness of the former might be manifested 
by what he suffered (Contra Hceres. iii. 23). 

Heretics existed in ancient times who repre- 
sented Cain and Abel as embodying two spiritual 
powers, of which the mightier was that of Cain, 
and to which they accordingly rendered divine 

In the early Church Abel was considered the 
first of the martyrs, and many persons were ac- 
customed to pronounce his name with a particular 
reverence. An obscure sect arose under the title 
of Abelites, the professed object of which was 
to inculcate certain fanatical notions respect- 
ing marriage; but it was speedily lost amid a 
host of more popular parties. — H. S. 

ABEL (?3X ; Sept. 'AjSeA), a name of se- 
veral villages in Israel, with additions in the case 
of the more important, to distinguish them from 
one another. From a comparison of the Arabic 
and Syriac, it appears to mean/res/* grass; and 
the places so named may be conceived to have 
been in peculiarly verdant situations. In 1 Sam. 
vi. 18, it is used as an appellative, and probably 
signifies a grassy plain. 


a city in the north of Palestine, which seems to 
• have been of considerable strength from its his- 




tory, and of importance from its being called e a 
mother in Israel' (2 Sam. xx. 19). The identity of 
the city under these different names will be seen by 
a comparison of 2 Sam. xx. 14, 15, 18 ; 1 Kings xv. 
20 ; 2 Chron. xvi. 4. The addition of ' Maacah' 
marks it as belonging to, or being near to, the region 
Maacah, which lay eastward of the Jordan under 
Mount Lebanon. This is the town in which 
Sheba posted himself when he rebelled against 
David. Eighty years afterwards it was taken and 
sacked by Benhadad, king of Syria ; and 200 
years subsequently by Tiglath-pileser, who sent 
away the inhabitants captives into Assyria (2 
Kings xx. 29). 

ABEL-BETH-MAACHAH, that is, Abel near 
the house or city of Maacah : the same as Abel. 

ABEL-CARMAIM (D*pn? blN, place of 
the vineyards ; Sept. 5 E/3eAxap/^.i/z), a village of 
the Ammonites, about six miles from Philadel- 
phia, or Rabbath Ammon, according to Eusebius, 
in whose time the place was still rich in vine- 
yards (Judg. xi. 33). 

ABEL-MAIM. The same as Abel. 

ABEL-MEHOLAH, or Abel-Mea (?1K 
fPinp, place of the dance ; Sept. 'AyQeA/xeouAa), 
a town supposed to have stood near the Jordan, 
and some miles (Eusebius says ten) to the south 
of Bethshan or Scythopolis (1 Kings iv. 12). It 
is remarkable in connection with Gideon's victory 
over the Midianites (Judg. vii. 22), and as the 
birth-place of Elisha (1 Kings xix. 16). 

ABEL-MIZRAIM (DfMft? ;>3K, the mourn- 
ing of the Egyptians ; Sept. XlivQos Aijvtttov), 
the name of a threshing-floor, so called on account 
of the ' great mourning' made there for Jacob 
by the funeral party from Egypt (Gen. l. 11). 
Jerome places it between Jericho and the Jordan, 
where Bethagla afterwards stood. 

ABEL-SHITTIM (D^H blX, place of 
acacias ; Sept. BeAtfS), a town in the plains of 
Moab, on the east of the Jordan, between which 
and Beth-Jesimoth was the last encampment of the 
Israelites on that side the river (Num. xxxiii. 49). 
It is more frequently called Shittim merely (Num. 
xxv. 1 ; Josh. ii. 1 ; Mic. vi. 5). Eusebius says it 
was in the neighbourhood of Mount Peor ; and in 
the time of Josephus it was known as Abila, and 
stood sixty stadia from the Jordan (Antiq. iv. 
8, 1 ; v. 1, 1). The place is noted for the severe 
punishment which was there inflicted upon the 
Israelites when they were seduced into the worship 
of Baal-Peor, through their evil intercourse with 
the Moabites and Midianites. 

ABELA. [Abila.] 

ABI, the mother of King Hezekiah (2 Kings 
xviii. 2), called also Abijah (2 Chron. xxix. 1). 
Her father's name was Zachariah, perhaps the 
same who was taken by Isaiah (viii. 2) for a 

ABIA. [Abijah, 3.] 

ABIAH or Abijah (fPHX, ' pater Jehovce, 
i.e. vir divinus, ut videtur, i. q. DTvK W ) iS, , 
Gesenius in Thesaur.; Sept. 'A/3(a), one of the 
sons of Samuel, who were intrusted with the ad- 
ministration of justice, and whose misconduct 
afforded the ostensible ground on which the Is- 
raelites demanded that their government should be 
changed into a monarchy (1 Sam. viii. 1-5). 

ABI-ALBON. [Abiel 2.] 

ABIATHAR pn£& father of abundance ; 

Sept. 'A/3id0ap), the tenth high-priest of the Jews, 
and fourth in descent from Eli. When his fa- 
ther, the high-priest Abimelech, was slain with 
the priests at Nob, for suspected partiality to the 
fugitive David, Abiathar escaped the massacre ; 
and bearing with him the most essential part of 
the priestly raiment [Ephod], repaired to the 
son of Jesse, who was then in the cave of Adul- 
lam (1 Sam. xxii. 20-23 ; xxiii. 6). He was 
well received by David, and became the priest of 
the party during its exile and wanderings. As 
such he sought and received for David responses 
from God. When David became king of Judah 
he appointed Abiathar high-priest. Meanwhile 
Zadok had been appointed high-priest by Saul, 
and continued to act as such while Abiathar was 
high-priest in Judah. The appointment of Zadok 
was not only unexceptionable in itself, but was 
in accordance with the divine sentence of depo- 
sition which had been passed, through Samuel, 
upon the house of Eli (1 Sam. ii. 30-36). When, 
therefore, David acquired the kingdom of Israel, 
he had no just ground on which Zadok could be 
removed, and Abiathar set in his place ; and' the 
attempt to do so. would probably have been 
offensive to his new subjects, who had been ac- 
customed to the ministration of Zadok, and whose 
good feeling he was anxious to cultivate. The 
king got over this difficulty by allowing both 
appointments to stand; and until the end of 
David's reign Zadok and Abiathar were joint 
high-priests. How the details of duty were set- 
tled, under this somewhat anomalous arrange- 
ment, we are not informed. As a high-priest 
Abiathar must have been perfectly aware of the 
divine intention that Solomon should be the suc- 
cessor of David : he was therefore the least ex- 
cusable, in some respects, of all those who were 
parties in the attempt to frustrate that intention 
by raising Adonijah to the tin-one. So his con- 
duct seems to have been viewed by Solomon, 
who, in deposing him from the high-priesthood, 
and directing him to withdraw into private life, 
plainly told him that only his sacerdotal cha- 
racter, and his former services to David, pre- 
served him from capital punishment. This 
deposition of Abiathar completed the doom 
long before denounced upon the house of Eli, 
who was of the line of Ithamar, the younger son 
of Aaron. Zadok, who remained the high-priest, 
was of the elder line of Eleazer. Solomon was 
probably not sorry to have occasion to remove 
the anomaly of two high-priests of different lines, 
and to see the undivided pontificate in the senior 
house of Eleazer (1 Kings i. 7, 19; ii. 26, 27). 

In Mark ii. 26, a circumstance is described as 
occurring ' in the days of Abiathar, the high- 
priest,' which appears, from 1 Sam. xxi. 1, to have 
really occurred when his father Abimelech was the 
high-priest. Numerous solutions of this difficulty 
have been offered. The most probable in itself 
is that which interprets the reference thus ' in the 
days of Abiathar, loho icas afterwards the 
high-priest' (Bishop Middleton, Greek Article, 
pp. 188-190). But this leaves open another diffi- 
culty which arises from the precisely opposite 
reference (in 2 Sam. viii. 17 ; 1 Chron. xviii. 16 ; 
xxiv. 3, 6, 31) to 'Abimelech, the son of Abia- 


thar,' as the person who was high-priest along 
with Zadok, and who was deposed by Solomon ; 
whereas the history describes that personage as 
Abiathar, the son of Abimelech. The only ex- 
planation which seems to remove all these diffi- 
culties — although we cannot allege it to be alto- 
gether satisfactory — is, that both father and son 
bore the two names of Abimelech and Abiathar, 
and might be, and were called by, either. But 
although it was not unusual for the Jews to have 
two names, it was not usual for both father and 
son to have the same two names. We therefore 
incline to leave the passage in Mark ii. 26, as 
explained above ; and to conclude that the other 
discrepancies arose from an easy and obvious 
transposition of words by the copyists, which was 
afterwards perpetuated. In these places, the 
Syriac and Arabic versions have ' Abiathar, the 
son of Abimelech.' 
ABIB. [Nisan.] 

1. ABIEL ('PX'ON!, father of strength, i. e. 
strong ; Sept. 'Aj3i-r\\), the father of Kish, whose 
son Saul was the first king of Israel, and of Ner, 
whose son Abner was captain of the host to his 
cousin Saul (1 Sam. ix. 1 ; xiv. 5). 

2. ABIEL, one of the thirty most distinguished 
men of David's armv. (1 Chron. xi. 32). He is 
called Abi-albon (])2?V "OK) in 2 Sam. xxiii. 
31 ; a name which has precisely the same signi- 
fication (father of strength) as the other. 

ABIEZER CiPPJISi father of help; Sept. 
'AjSie'^epj Josh. xvii. 2), a son of Gilead, the 
grandson of Manasseh (Num. xxvi. 30), and 
founder of the family to which Gideon belonged, 
and which bore his name as a patronymic — 
Abiezrites (Judg. vi. 34 ; viii. 2). Gideon him- 
self has a very beautiful and delicate allusion to 
this patronymic in his answer to the fierce and 
proud Ephraimites, who, after he had defeated 
the Midianites with 300 men, chiefly of the 
family of Abiezer, came to the pursuit, and cap- 
tured the two Midianitish princes Zeba and Zal- 
munna. They sharply rebuked him for having 
engrossed all the glory of the transaction by not 
calling them into action at the first. But he 
soothed their pride by a remark which insinuated 
that their exploit, in capturing the princes, 
although late, surpassed his own in defeating 
their army : — ' What have I done now in com- 
parison with you ? Is not the (grape) gleaning of 
Ephraim better than the vintage of Abiezer ? ' 
(Judg. viii. 1-3). 

ABIGAIL (/»3W*f or hvi$, father of joy; 
Sept. 'A/3iyaia), the wife of a prosperous sheep- 
master, called Nabal, who dwelt in the district 
of Carmel, west of the Dead Sea. She is known 
chiefly for the promptitude and discretion of her 
conduct in taking measures to avert the wrath of 
David, which, as she justly apprehended, had 
been violently excited by the insulting treatment 
which his messengers had received from her hus- 
band [Nabal]. She hastily prepared a liberal 
supply of provisions, of which David's troop stood 
in much need — and went forth to meet him, 
attended by only one servant. When they 
met, lie was marching to exterminate Nabal and 
all that belonged to him; and not only was his 
rage mollified by her prudent remonstrances and 
delicate management, but he became sensible 



that the vengeance which he had purposed was 
not wan-anted by the circumstances, and was 
thankful that he had been prevented from 'shed- 
ding innocent blood. The beauty and prudence 
of Abigail made such an impression upon David 
on this occasion, that when, not long after, he 
heard of Nabal's death, he sent for her, and she 
became his wife (1 Sam. xxv. 14-42). By her 
it is usually stated that he had two sons, Chi- 
leab and Daniel ; but it is more likely that the 
Cliileab of 2 Sam. iii. 3, is the same as the 
Daniel of 1 Chron. iii. 1 ; the son of Abigail 
being known by both these names. 

1. ABIHAIL (ST^N;, father of light or 
splendour; Sept. 'AjSioua), the wife of Rehoboam, 
king of Judah. She is called the daughter of Eliab, 
David's elder brother (2 Chron. xi. IS): but, as 
David began to reign more than eighty years before 
her marriage, and was 30 years old when he became 
king, we are doubtless to understand that she was 
only a descendant of Eliab. This name, as home 
by a female, illustrates the remarks tinder Ab. 

2. ABIHAIL (^n-as;, father of might, 
i.e. mighty; Sept. 'Afiixaik). This name, al- 
though the same as the preceding in the autho- 
rized version, is, in the original, different both in 
orthography and signification. It should be 
written Abichail. The name was bome by 
several persons : 1. Abichaii., the sou of Huri, 
one of the family-chiefs of the tribe of Gad, who 
settled in Bashan (1 Chron. v. 14); 2. Abichail, 
the father of Zuriel, who was the father of the Le- 
vitical tribes of Merari (Num. iii. 35); 3. Abi- 
chail, the father of queen Esther, and brother of 
Mordecai (Esth. ii. 15). 

ABIHU (K-IITa^, father of him; Sept. 
'A/3k>u8), the second of the sons of Aaron, who, 
with his brothers Nadab, Eleazer, and Ithamar, 
was set apart and consecrated for the priesthood 
(Exod. xxviii. 1). When, at the first establish- 
ment of the ceremonial worship, the victims 
offered on the great brazen altar were consumed 
by fire from heaven, it was directed that this fire 
should always be kept up ; and that the daily 
incense should be burnt in censers filled with 
it from the great altar. But one day, Nadab 
and Abihu presumed to neglect this regulation, 
and offered incense in censers filled with ' strange' 
or common fire. For this they were instantly 
struck dead by lightning, and were taken away 
and buried in their clothes without the camp 
[Aaron]. There can be no doubt that this severe 
example had the intended efi'ect of enforcing be- 
coming attention to the most minute observances 
of the ritual service. As immediately after the 
record of this transaction, and in apparent refer- 
ence to it, comes a prohibition of wine or strong 
drink to the priests, whose turn it might be to 
enter the tabernacle, it is not unfairly surmised 
that Nadab and Abihu were intoxicated when 
they committed this serious error in their minis- 
trations (Lev. x. 1-11). 

1. ABIJAH (n*3S?, -injlS*, see signif. in 
Abiah ; Sept. 'A0id, 2 Chron. xiii. 1). He is also 
called Abijam (DUN; Sept 'Afliod, 1 Kings xv. 
1). Lightfoot (Harm. O. T. in loc.) thinks that the 
writer in Chronicles, not describing his reign as 
wicked, admits the sacred Jah in his name; but 
which the book of Kings, charging him with fol- 



lowing the evil ways of his father, changes into 
Jam. t This may be fanciful ; but such changes 
of name were not unusual. Abijah was the second 
king of the separate kingdom of Judah, being the 
son of Rehoboam, and grandson of Solomon. He 
began to reign B.C. 958 (Hales, b.c. 973), in the 
eighteenth year of Jeroboam, king of Israel ; and 
he reigned three years. At the commencement 
of his reign, looking on the well-founded sepa- 
ration of the ten tribes from the house of David 
as rebellion, Abijah made a vigorous attempt 
to bring them back to their allegiance. In this 
he failed ; although a signal victory over Jero- 
boam, who had double his force and much greater 
experience, enabled him to take several cities 
which had been held by Israel. The speech 
which Abijah addressed to the opposing army 
before the battle has been much admired. It was 
well suited to its object, and exhibits correct 
notions of the theocratical institutions. His view 
of the political position of the ten tribes with 
respect to the house of David is, however, obvi- 
ously erroneous, although such as a king of Judah 
was likely to take. The numbers reputed to have 
been present in this action are 800,00-0 on the side 
of Jeroboam, 400,000 on the side of Abijah, and 
500,000 left dead on the field. Hales and others 
regard these extraordinary numbers as corrup- 
tions, and propose to reduce them to 80,000, 
40,000, and 50,000 respectively, as in the Latin 
Vulgate of Sixtus Quintus, and many earlier 
editions, and in the old Latin translation of Jo- 
sephus ; and probably also in his original Greek 
text, as is collected by De Vignoles from Abar- 
banel's charge against the historian of having made 
Jeroboam's loss no more than 50,000 men, contrary 
to the Hebrew text (Kennicott's Dissertations, 
i. 533; ii. 201, &c. 564). The book of Chronicles 
mentions nothing concerning Abijah adverse to the 
impressions which we receive from his conduct on 
this occasion ; but in Kings we are told that ' he 
walked in all the sins of his father' (1 Kings 
xv. 3). He had fourteen wives, by whom he left 
twenty-two sons and sixteen daughters. Asa suc- 
ceeded him. 

There is a difficulty connected with the ma- 
ternity of Abijah. In 1 Kings xv. 2, we read, 
' His mother's name was Maachah, the daughter 
of Abishalom ;' but in 2 Chron. xiii. 2, ' His 
mother's name was Michaiah, the daughter of 
Uriel of Gibeah. 1 Maachah and Michaiah are 
variations of the same name ; and Abishalom is 
in all likelihood Absalom, the son of David. The 
word (]"Q) rendered ' daughter ' is applied in 
the Bible not only to a man's child, but to his 
niece, grand-daughter, or great-grand-daughter. It 
is therefore probable that Uriel of Gibeah mar- 
ried Tamar, the beautiful daughter of Absa- 
lom (2 Sam. xiv. 27), and by her had Maachah, 
who was thus the daughter of Uriel and grand- 
daughter of Absalom. 

2. ABIJAH, son of Jeroboam I., king of Israel. 
His severe and threatening illness induced Jero- 
boam to send Ins wife with a present [Present], 
suited to the disguise in which she went, to con- 
sult the prophet Ahijah respecting his recovery. 
This prophet was the same who had, in the days 
of Solomon, foretold to Jeroboam his elevation to 
the throne of Israel. Though blind with age, he 
knew the disguised wife of Jeroboam, and was 
authorized, by the prophetic impulse that came 


upon him, to reveal to her that, because there 
was found in Abijah only, of all the house of 
Jeroboam, ' some good thing towards the Lord,' 
he only, of all that house, should come to his 
grave in peace, and be mourned in Israel. Ac- 
cordingly, when the mother returned home, the 
youth died as she crossed the threshold of the 
door. ' And they buried him, and all Israel 
mourned for him' (1 Kings xiv. 1-18). 

3. ABIJAH, one of the descendants of Eleazer, 
the son of Aaron, and chief of one of the twenty- 
four courses or orders into which the whole body 
of the priesthood was divided by David (1 Chron. 
xxiv. 10). Of these the course of Abijah was the 
eighth. Only four of the courses returned from 
the captivity, of which that of Abijah was not 
one (Ezra ii. 36-39; Neh. vii. 39-42; xii. 1). 
But the four were divided into the original num- 
ber of twenty-four, with the original names ; and 
it hence happens that Zecharias, the father of 
John the Baptist, is described as belonging to the 
course of Abijah or ' Abia ' (Luke i. 5). 

ABIJAM [Abijah, 1.] 

ABILA, capital of the Abilene of Lysanias 
(Luke iii. 1) ; and distinguished from other 
places of the same name as the Abila of Lysa- 
nias ('A/3iA.?7 rov Avffavlov), and (by Josephus) as 
' the Abila of Lebanon.' It is unnecessary to rea- 
son upon the meaning of this Greek name ; for it 
is obviously a form of the Hebrew Abel, which 
was applied to several places, and means a 
grassy spot. This has been supposed to be the 
same as Abel-beth-Maacah, but without founda- 
tion, for that was a city of Naphtali, which Abila 
was not. An old tradition fixes this as the 
place where Abel was slain by Cain, which is in 
unison with the belief that the region of Da- 
mascus was the land of Eden. But the same 
has been said of other places bearing the name 
of Abel or Abila, and appears to have originated 
in the belief (created by the Septuagint and the 
versions which followed it) that the words are 
identical; but, in fact, the. name of the son of 
Adam is in Hebrew Hebel (?3!"l), and therefore 
different from the repeated local name of Abel 
(?D&$). However, under the belief that the 
place and district derived their name from Abel, 
a monument upon the top of a high hill, near the 
source of the river Barrada, which rises among the 
eastern roots of Anti-Libanus, and waters Damas- 
cus, has long been pointed out as the tomb of 
Abel, and its length (thirty yards) has been 
alleged to correspond with his stature ! (Quares- 
mius, Ehwid. Terrce Sanctce, vii. 7, 1 ; Maun- 
drell, under May 4th). This spot is on the 
road from Heliopolis (Baalbec) to Damascus, 
between which towns — thirty-two Roman miles 
from the former and eighteen from the latter — ■ 
Abila is indeed placed in the Itinerary of An- 
toninus. About the same distance north-west 
of Damascus is Souk Wady Barrada, where 
an inscription was found by Mr. Banks, which, 
beyond doubt, identifies that rjlace with the Abila 
of Lysanias (Quart. Rev. xxvi. 388 ; Hogg's 
Damascus, i. 301). Souk means market, and is 
an appellation often added to villages where 
periodical markets are held. The name of Souk 
(Wady) Barrada first occurs in Burckhardt (Syria, 
p. 2) ; and he states that there are here two vil- 
lages, built on the opposite sides of the Barrada. 
The lively and refreshing green of this neigh- 


hourhcod is noticed by him and other travellers, 
and undesignedly suggests the propriety of the 
name of Abel, in its Hebrew acceptation of a 
grassy spot. 

ABILENE ('APiXwy, Euke iii. 1), the small 
district or territory which took its name from the 
chief town, Abila. Its situation is in some 
degree determined by that of the town ; but 
its precise limits and extent remain unknown. 
Northward it must have reached beyond the 
Upper Barrada, in order to include Abila ; and 
it is probable that its southern border may have 
extended to Mount Hermon (Jebel es-Sheikh). It 
seems to have included the eastern declivities of 
Anti-Libanus, and the fine valleys between its 
base and the hills which front the eastern plains. 
This is a very beautiful and fertile region, well 
wooded, and watered by numerous springs from 
Anti-Libanus. It also affords fine pastures ; and 
in most respects contrasts with the stem and 
barren western slopes of Anti-Libanus. 

This territory had been governed as a tetrarchate 
by Lysanias, son of Ptolemy and grandson of Men- 
nseus (Joseph. Antiq. xiv. 13, 3), but he was put 
to death, b.c. 33, through the intrigues of Cleo- 
patra, who then took possession of the province 
{Antiq. xiv. 4, 1). After her death it fell to Au- 
gustus, who rented it out to one Zenodorus ; but 
as he did not keep ;t clear of robbers, it was 
taken from him, and given to Herod the Great 
{Antiq. xv. 10, 1 ; Bell. Jud. i. 20, 4). At his 
death, a part (the southern, doubtless) of the terri- 
tory was added to Trachonitis and Itursea to form 
a tetrarchy for his son Philip; but by far the 
larger portion, including the city of Abila, was 
then, or shortly afterwards, bestowed on another 
Lysanias, mentioned by Luke (iii. 1), who is 
supposed to have been a descendant of the former 
Lysanias, but who is nowhere mentioned by Jo- 
sephus. Indeed, nothing is said by him or any 
other profane writer, of this part of Abilene until 
about ten years after the time referred to by 
Luke, when the emperor Caligula gave it to 
Agrippa I. as ' tire tetrarchy of Lysanias' (Jo- 
seph. Antiq. xviii. 6, 10), to whom it was after- 
wards confirmed by Claudius. At his death, it 
was included in that part of his possessions which 
•vent to his son Agrippa II. This explanation 
(which we owe to the acuteness and research of 
Winer), as to the division of Abilene between 
Lysanias and Philip, removes the apparent dis- 
crepancy between Luke, who calls Lysanias 
tetrarch of Abilene at the very time that, accord- 
ing to Josephus, (a part of) Abilene was hi the 
possession of Philip. 

1. ABIMELECH (^I^IS. father of the 
king, or perhaps royal father ; Sept. 'Affi/jJXex), 
the name of the Philistine king of Gerar in the 
time of Abraham (Gen. xx. 1, sqq. : b.c. IS98 ; 
Hales, b.c. 2054) ; but, from its recurrence, it 
was probably less a proper name than a titular 
distinction, like Pharaoh for the kings of 
Egypt, or Augustus for the emperors of Rome. 
Abraham removed into his territory after the 
destruction* of Sodom ; and fearing that the 
extreme beauty of Sarah might bring him into 
lilriculfjes, he declared her to be his sister. The 
conduct of Abimelech in taking Sarah into his 
harem, shows that even in those early times 
kings claimed the right of taking to themselves 
the unmarried females not only of their natural 



subjects, but of those who sojourned in their do- 
minions. Another contemporary instance of this 
custom occurs in Gen. xii. 15 ; and one of later 
date in Esth. ii. 3. But Abimelech, obedient to 
a divine warning communicated to him in a 
dream, accompanied by the information that Abra- 
ham was a sacred person who had intercourse with 
God, restored her to her husband. As a mark of 
his respect he added valuable gifts, and offered 
the patriarch a settlement in any part of the 
country ; but he nevertheless did not forbear to 
rebuke, with mingled delicacy -and sarcasm, the 
deception which had been practised upon him 
(Gen. xx.). The most curious point in this trans- 
action seems to be, that it appears to have been 
admitted, on all hands, that he had an undoubted 
right to appropriate to his harem whatever un- 
married woman he pleased — all the evil in this 
case being that Sarah was already married : so 
early had some of the most odious principles of 
despotism taken root in the East. The interposi- 
tion of Providence to deliver Sarah twice from 
royal harems will not seem superfluous when it is 
considered how carefully women are there se- 
cluded, and how impossible it is to obtain access 
to them, or get them back again (Esth. iv. 5). It 
is scarcely necessary to add that these practices 
still prevail in some Eastern countries, especially 
in Persia. The present writer, when at Tabreez, 
in the days of Abbas Meerza, was acquainted 
with a Persian khan who lived in continual 
anxiety and alarm lest his only daughter should 
be required for the harem of the prince, who, 
he was aware, had heard of her extreme 
beauty. Nothing further is recorded of King 
Abimelech, except that a few years after, he 
repaired to the camp of Abraham, who had re- 
moved southward beyond his borders, accom- 
panied by Phichol, ' the chief captain of his host,' 
to invite the patriarch to contract with him a 
league of peace and friendship. Abraham con- 
sented ; and this first league on record [Alli- 
ance] was confirmed by a mutual oath, made at 
a well which had been dug by Abraham, but which 
the herdsmen of Abimelech had forcibly seized 
without his knowledge. It was restored to the 
rightful owner, on which Abraham named it 
Beersheba (the Well of the Oath), and conse- 
crated the spot to the worship of Jehovah (Gen, 
xxi. 22-34). 

2. ABIMELECH, another king of Gerar, in 
tire time of Isaac (about b.c. 1S04 ; Hales, I960), 
who is supposed to have been the son of the pre- 
ceding. Isaac sought refuge in his territory 
during a famine ; and having the same fear re- 
specting his fair Mesopotamian wife, Rebekah, as 
his father had entertained respecting Sarah, he 
reported her to be his sister. This brought upon 
him the rebuke of Abimelech, when lie acci- 
dentally discovered the truth. The country ap- 
pears to have become more cultivated and 
populous than at the time of Abrahams visit, 
nearly a century before; and the inhabitants 
were more jealous of the presence of such 
powerful pastoral chieftains. In those times, as 
now, wells of water were of so much importance 
for agricultural as well as pastoral purposes, that 
they gave a proprietary right to the soil, not pre- 
viously appropriated, in which they were dug. 
Abraham had dug wells during his sojourn in 
the country; and, to bar the claim which re- 




salted from them, the Philistines had afterwards 
filled them up ; but they were now cleared out 
by Isaac, who proceeded to cultivate the ground 
to which they gave him a right. The virgin soil 
yielded him a hundred-fold ; and his other pos- 
sessions, his flocks and herds, also received such 
prodigious increase that the jealousy of the Phi- 
listines could not be suppressed ; and Abimelech 
desired him to seek more distant 'quarters, in lan- 
guage which gives a high notion of the wealth of 
the patriarchal chiefs, and the extent of their 
establishments : — ' Depart from us : for thou art 
more and mightier than loe? Isaac complied, 
and went out into the open country, and dug 
wells for his cattle. But the shepherds of the 
Philistines, out with their flocks, were not in- 
clined to allow the claim to exclusive pasturage 
in these districts to be thus established ; and their 
opposition induced the quiet patriarch to make 
successive removals, until he reached such a dis- 
tance that his operations were no longer disputed. 
Afterwards, when he was at Beersheba, he re- 
ceived a visit from Abimelech, who was attended 
by Ahuzzath, his friend, and Phichol, the chief 
captain of his army. They were received with 
some reserve by Isaac ; but when Abimelech ex- 
plained that it was his wish to renew, with one 
so manifestly blessed of God, the covenant of 
peace and goodwill which had been contracted 
between their fathers, they were more cheerfully 
entertained, and the desired covenant was, with 
due ceremony, contracted accordingly. (Gen. 
xxvi.) From the facts recorded respecting the 
connection of the two Abimelechs with Abraham 
and Isaac, it is manifest that the Philistines, 
even at this early time, had a government more 
organized, and more in unison with that type 
which we now regard as Oriental, than appeared 
among the native Canaanites, one of whose na- 
tions had been expelled by these foreign settlers 
from the territory which they occupied [Phi- 

3. ABIMELECH, a son of Gideon, by a con- 
cubine-wife, a native of Shechem, where her family 
had considerable influence. Through that influ- 
ence Abimelech was proclaimed king after the 
death of his father, who had himself refused 
that honour, when tendered to him, both for 
himself and his children (Judg. viii. 22-24). In 
a short time, a considerable part of Israel seems to 
have recognised his rule. One of the first acts of 
his reign was to destroy his brothers, seventy in 
number, being the first example of a system of 
barbarous state policy of which there have been 
frequent instances in the East, and which indeed 
has only within a recent period been discon- 
tinued. They were slain 'on one stone' at 
Ophrah, the native city of the family. Only one, 
the youngest, named Jotham, escaped ; and he 
had the boldness to make his appearance on 
Mount Gerizim, where the Shechemites were as- 
sembled for some public purpose (perhaps to in- 
augurate Abimelech), and rebuke them in his 
famous parable of the trees choosing a king 
[Jotham; Parable]. In the course of three years 
the Shechemites found ample cause to repent of 
what they had done ; they eventually revolted in 
Abimelech's absence, and caused an ambuscade 
to be laid in the mountains, with the design of 
destroying him on his return. But Zebul, his 
governor in Shechem, contrived to apprise him of 

these circumstances, so that he was enabled to 
avoid the snare laid for him ; and, having hastily 
assembled some troops, appeared unexpectedly 
before Shechem. The people of that place had 
meanwhile secured the assistance of one Gaal 
and his followers [Gaal], who marched out to 
give Abimelech battle. He was defeated, and 
returned into the town ; and his inefficiency and 
misconduct in the action had been so manifest, 
that the peojsle were induced by Zebul to expel 
him and his followers. Although without his pro- 
tection, the people still went out to the labours of 
the field. This being told Abimelech, who was 
at Arumah, he laid an ambuscade in four bodies 
in the neighbourhood ; and when the men came 
forth in the morning, two of the ambushed parties 
rose against them, while the other two seized the 
city gates to prevent their return. Afterwards 
the whole force united against the city, which, 
being now deprived of its most efficient inhabit- 
ants, was easily taken. It was completely de- 
stroyed by the exasperated victor, and the ground 
strewn with salt, symbolical of the desolation to 
which it was doomed. The fortress, however, still 
remained ; but the occupants, dee/ning it un- 
tenable, withdrew to the temple of Baal-Berith, 
which stood in a more commanding situation. 
Abimelech employed his men in collecting and 
piling wood against this building, which was 
then set on fire and destroyed, with the thousand 
men who were in it. Afterwards Abimelech went 
to reduce Thebez, which had also revolted. The 
town was taken with little difficulty, and the 
people withdrew into the citadel. Here Abime- 
lech resorted to his favourite operation, and while 
heading a" party to burn down the gate, he was 
struck on the head by a large stone cast down by 
a woman from the wall above. Perceiving that 
he had received a death-blow, he directed his 
armour-bearer to thrust him through . with his 
sword, lest it should be said that lie fell by a 
woman's hand. Thus ended the first attempt to 
establish a monarchy in Israel. The chapter in 
which these events are recorded (Judg. ix.) gives 
a more detailed and lively view of the military 
operations of that age than elsewhere occurs, and 
claims the close attention of those who study that 
branch of antiquities. Abimelech himself ap- 
pears to have been a bold and able commander, 
but utterly uncontrolled by religion, principle, 
or humanity in his ambitious enterprises. His 
fate resembled that of Pyrrhus II., king of 
Epirus (Justin, xxv. 5; Pausan. i. 13; Thucyd. 
iii. 74) ; and the dread of the ignominy of it3 
being said of a warrior that he died by a woman's 
hand was very general (Sophocl. Trach. 1064 ; 
Senec. Here. Oet. 1176). Vainly did Abimelech 
seek to avoid this disgrace ; for the fact of his 
death by the hand of a woman was long after 
associated with his memory (2 Sam. xi. 21). 

ABINADAB (Xl^nK, father of voluntari- 
ness; Sept. 'A/xivaSafi). There are several persons 
of this name, all of whom are also called Amina- 
dab — the letters b and m being very frequently 
interchanged in Hebrew. 

1. ABINADAB, one of the eight sons of Jesse, 
and one of the three who followed Saul to the 
war with the Philistines (1 Sam. xvi. 8). 

2. ABINADAB, one of Saul's sons, who was 
slain at the battle of Gilboa (1 Sam. xxxi. 2). 

3. ABINADAB, the Levite of Kirjath-jearirn, 


in whose house, which was on a hill, the Ark of 
the Covenant was deposited, after being brought 
back from the land of the Philistines. It was 
committed to the special charge of his son Elea- 
zer ; and remained there seventy years, until it 
was removed by David (1 Sam. vii. 1, 2; 1 Chron. 
xiii. 7). [Ark.] 

1. ABIRAM (pyi^, father of altitude, i.e. 
high ; Sept. 'A^eipdv), one of the family-chiefs of 
the tribe of Reuben, who, with Dathan and On 
of the same tribe, joined Korah, of the tribe of 
Levi, in a conspiracy against Aaron and Moses 
[Aaron]. (Num. xvi.) 

2. ABIRAM, eldest son of Hiel the Bethelite 
(1 Kings xvi. 34). [Hiel ; Jericho.] 

ABISHAG Q^IX, father of error; Sept. 
'Afiiady), a beautiful young woman of Shunam, 
in the tribe of Issachar, who was chosen by the 
servants of David to be introduced into the royal 
harem, for the special purpose of ministering to 
him, and cherishing him in his old age. She be- 
came his wife ; but the marriage was never con- 
summated. Some time after the death of David, 
Adonijah, his eldest son, persuaded Bathsheba, 
the mother of Solomon, to entreat the king that 
Abishag might be given to him in marriage. 
But as rights and privileges peculiarly regal 
were associated with the control and possession 
of the harem of the deceased kings [Harem], 
Solomon detected in this application a fresh aspi- 
ration to the throne, which he visited with death 
(1 Kings i. 1-1; ii. 13-25) [Adonijah]. 

ABISHAI (»B»3S, father of gifts; Sept. 
'A/3ecnra and 'A^icrdt), a nephew of David by his 
sister Zeruiah, and brother of Joab and Asahel. 
The three brothers devoted themselves zealously 
to the interests of their uncle during his wander- 
ings. Though David had more reliance upon the 
talents of Joab, he appears to have given more 
of his private confidence to Abishai, who seems 
to have attached himself in a peculiar manner 
to his person, ■ as we ever find him near, and 
ready for council or action, on critical occasions. 
Abishai, indeed, was rather a man of action than 
of council ; and although David must have been 
gratified by his devoted and uncompromising 
attachment, he had more generally occasion to 
check the impulses of his ardent temperament 
than to follow his advice. Abishai was one of 
the two persons whom David asked to accom- 
pany him to the camp of Saul ; and he alone 
accepted the perilous distinction (1 Sam. xxvi. 
5-9). The desire he then expressed to smite the 
sleeping king, identifies him as the man who 
afterwards burned to rush upon Shimei and slay 
him for his abuse of David (2 Sam. xvi. 9). 
For when the king fled beyond the Jordan from 
Absalom, Abishai was again by his side : and he 
was entrusted with the command of one of the 
three divisions of the army which crushed that 
rebellion (2 Sam. xviii. 2). Afterwards, in a 
war witli the Philistines, David was in imminent 
peril of his life from a giant named Ishbi-benob ; 
but was rescued by Abishai, who slew the giant 
(2 Sam. xx. 15-17). He was also the chief of 
the three ' mighties,' who, probably in the same 
war, performed the chivalrous exploit of break- 
ing through the host of the Philistines to procure 
David a draught of water from the well of his 



native Bethlehem (2 Sam. xxiii. 14-17). Among 
the exploits of this hero it is mentioned that he 
withstood 300 men and slew them with his 
spear : but the occasion of this adventure, and 
the time and manner of his death, are equally 
unknown. In 2 Sam. viii. 13, the victory over 
the Edomites in the Valley of Salt is ascribed to 
David, but in 1 Chron. xviii. 12, to Abishai. It 
is hence probable that the victory was actually 
gained by Abishai, but is ascribed to David as 
king and commander-in-chief. 

ABISHUA (VWm, father of safety; Sept. 
'Afiiaoi), the son of Phinehas, and fourth high- 
priest of the Jews (1 Chron. vi. 50). The com- 
mencement and duration of his pontificate are 
uncertain, but the latter is inferred from cir- 
cumstances, confirmed by the Chronicon of Alex- 
andria, to have included the period in which 
Ehud was judge, and probably the preceding 
period of servitude to Eglon of Moab. Blair 
places him from b.c. 1352 to 1302 — equivalent 
to Hales, b.c. 1513 to 1463. This high-priest is 
called Abiezer by Josephus (Aniiq. v. 12, 5). 

ABIYONAH (mVn^Sept^Tnra^). This 
word, occurs only once in the Bible, Eccles. 
xii. 5 : ' When the almond-tree shall flourish, 
and the grasshopper shall be a burden, and desire 
shall fail ; because man goeth to his long home.' 
The word translated desire is abiyonah, which 
by others has been considered to signify the 
caper-plant. The reasons assigned for' the 
latter opinion are : that the Rabbins apply the 
term abionoth to the small fruit of trees and 
berries, as well as to that of the caper-bush; 
that the caper-bush is common in Syria and 
Arabia ; that its fruit was in early times eaten as a 
condiment, being stimulating in its nature, and 

[Cappaxis spinosa.] 

therefore calculated to excite desire ; (hat as the 
caper-bush grows on tombs, it will be liuble to 



be destroyed when tnese are opened ; and, finally, 
that as Solomon speaks here in symbols and 
allegories, we must suppose him to deviate from 
the course he had apparently prescribed to him- 
self, if he were to express in plain .words that 
' desire shall fail,' instead of intimating the same 
thing, by the failure of that which is supposed 
to have been used to excite desire. 

Celsius (Hierobotanicon, i. 210) argues, on 
the contrary, that Solomon in other places, when 
treating of the pleasures of youth, never speaks of 
capers, but of wine and perfumes ; that, had he 
wished to adduce anything of the kind, he would 
have selected something more remarkable ; that 
capers, moreover, instead of being pleasantly sti- 
mulant, are rather acrid and hurtful, and though 
occasionally employed by the ancients as condi- 
ments, were little esteemed by them ; and, finally, 
that the word abionoth of the Rabbins is distinct 
from the abiyonah of this passage, as is ad- 
mitted even by Ursinus : ' Nam quod vocabu- 
lum ni^V— ^ Abionoth, quod Rabbinis usitatum, 
alia quaedam puncta habeat, non puto tanti 
esse momenti' (Arboret. Biblicum, xxviii. i). To 
this Celsius replies : ' Immo, nisi vocales et 
puncta genuina in Ebraicis observentur, Babelica 
fiet confusio, et coelo terra miscebitur. Incer- 
tum pariter pro certo assumunt, qui cappares vo- 
lunt proprie abionoth dici Rabbinis' (I. c. p. 213). 

But as the Septuagint, the Vulgate, and some 
other translations, have understood the caper- 
bush to be meant, it is desirable to give some 
account of it, especially as, from its ornamental 
nature, it could not but attract attention. There 
are, moreover, some points in its natural his- 
tory which have been overlooked, but which may 
serve to show that in the passage under review it 
might without impropriety have been employed 
in carrying out the figurative language with 
which the verse commences. 

The caper-plant belongs to a tribe of plants, 
the Capparidese, of which the species are found 
in considerable numbers in tropical countries, 
such as India, whence they extend northwards 
into Arabia, the north of Africa, Syria, and 
the south of Europe. The common caper-bush — 
Capparis sjrinosa, Linn, (the C. sativa of Persoon) 
— is common in the countries immediately sur- 
rounding the Mediterranean. Dioscorides de- 
scribes it as spreading in a circular manner on 
the ground, in poor soils and rugged situations ; 
and Pliny, ' as being set and sown in stony 
places ■especially.' Theophrastus states that it 
refuses to grow in cultivated ground. Dioscorides 
describes it as having thorns like a bramble, 
leaves like the quince, and fruit like the olive ; 
characters almost sufficient to identify it. The 
caper is well known to the Arabs, being their 


kibbur ; and designated also by the name 

^ oU ^ atlvuf or azuf. The bark of the root, which 

is still used in the East, as it formerly was in 
Europe, no doubt possesses some irritant property, 
as it was one of the five aperient roots. The 
unexpanded flower-buds, preserved in vinegar, are 
well known at our tables as a condiment by the 
name of capers. Parts of the plant seem to have 
Deen similarly used by the ancients. 

The caper-plant is showy and ornamental, 
growing in barren places in the midst of the 


rubbish of rains, or on the walls of buildings. 
It was observed by Ray on the Temple of Peace 
at Rome, and in other similar situations. It forms 
a much-branched, diffuse shrub, which annually 
loses its leaves. The branches are long and 
trailing ; smooth, but armed with double curved 
stipulary spines. The leaves are alternate, round- 
ish or oblong-oval, a little fleshy, smooth, of a 
green colour, but sometimes a little reddish. The 
flowers are large and showy, produced singly 
in the axils of the leaves, on stalks which are 
larger than the leaves. The calyx is four-leaved, 
coriaceous ; the petals are also four in number, 
white, and of an oval roundish form. The stamens 
are very numerous' and long ; and their filaments 
being tinged with purple, and terminated by the 
yellow anthers, give the flowers a very agreeable 
appearance. The ovary is borne upon a straight 
stalk, which is a little longer than the stamens, 
and which, as it ripens, droops and forms an oval 
or pear-shaped berry, enclosing within its pulp 
numerous small seeds. 

Many of the caper tribe, being remarkable fo i 
the long stalks by which their fruit is supported, 
conspicuously display, what also takes place in 
other plants, namely, the drooping and hang- 
ing down of the fruit as it ripens. As, then, the 
flowering of the almond-tree, in the first part of 
the verse, has been supposed to refer to the whiten- 
ing of the hair, so the drooping of the ripe fruit 
of a plant like the caper, which is conspicuous 
on the walls of buildings, and on tombs, may be 
supposed to typify the hanging down of the head 
before ' man goeth to his long home.' — J. F. R. 

ABLUTION, the ceremonial washing, 
whereby, as a symbol of purification from un- 
cleanness, a person was considered — 1. to be 
cleansed from the taint of an inferior and less 
pure condition, and initiated into a higher and 
purer state ; 2. to be cleansed from the soil of 
common life, and fitted for special acts of reli- 
gious service ; 3. to be cleansed from defilements 
contracted by particular acts or circumstances, 
and restored to the privileges of ordinary life ; 
4. as absolving or purifying himself, or declaring 
himself absolved and purified, from the guilt of 
a particular act. We do not meet with any 
such ablutions in patriarchal times : but under 
the Mosaical dispensation they all occur. 

A marked example of the first kind of ablution 
occurs when Aaron and his sons, on their being 
set apart for the priesthood, were washed with 
water before they were invested with the priestly 
robes and anointed with the holy oil (Lev. viii. 6). 
To this head we are inclined to refer the ablution 
of persons and raiment which was commanded to 
the whole of the Israelites, as a preparation to 
their receiving the law from Sinai (Exod. xix. 10- 
15). We also find examples of this kind of purifi- 
cation in connection with initiation into a higher 
state. Thus those admitted into the lesser or in- 
troductory mysteries of Eleusis were previous^ 


purified on the banks of the Ilissus, by water 
being poured upon them by the Udranos. 

The second kind of ablution was that which 
required the priests, on pain of death, to wash 
their hands and their feet before they approached 
the altar of God (Exod. xxx. 17-21). For this 
purpose a large basin of water was provided both 
at the tabernacle and at the temple. To this the 
Psalmist alludes when he says — ' I will wash my 
hands in innocency, and so will I compass thine 
altar ' (Ps. xxvi. 6). Hence it became the custom 
in the early Christian church for the ministers, in 
the view of the congregation, to wash their hands in 
a basin of water brought by the deacon, at the com- 
mencement of the communion (Jamieson, p. 126); 
and this practice, or something like it, is still 
retained in the Eastern churches, as well as in 
the church of Rome, when mass is celebrated. 
Similar ablutions by the priests before proceeding 
to perform the more sacred ceremonies were usual 
among the heathen. The Egyptian priests in- 
deed carried the practice to a burdensome extent, 
from which the Jewish priests were, perhaps de- 
signedly, exonerated ; and in their less torrid 
climate it was, for purposes of real cleanliness, 
less needful. Reservoirs of water were attached 
to the Egyptian temples ; and Herodotus (ii. 37) 
informs us that the priests shaved the whole of 
their bodies every third day, that no insect or 
other filth might be upon them when they served 
the gods, and that they washed themselves in cold 
water twice every day and twice every night : 
Porphyry says thrice a day, with a nocturnal 
ablution occasionally. This kind of ablution, 
as preparatory to a religious act, answers to the 
simple Wadu of the JVIoslems, which they are 
required to go through five times daily before 
their stated prayers. This makes the ceremonies 
of ablution much more conspicuous to a traveller 
in the Moslem East at the present day than they 
would appear among the ancient Jews, seeing 
that the law imposed this obligation on the priests 
only, not on the people. Connected as these 
Moslem ablutions are with various forms and 
imitative ceremonies, and recurring so frequently 
as they do, the avowedly heavy yoke of even the 
Mosaic law seems light in the comparison. 

In the third class of ablutions washing is re- 
garded as a purification from positive defile- 
ments. The Mosaical law recognises eleven 
species of uncleanness of this nature (Lev. xii.- 
xv.), the purification for which ceased at the 
end of a certain period, provided the unclean 
person then washed his body and his clothes ; 
but in a few cases, such as leprosy and the defile- 
ment contracted by touching a dead body, he 
remained unclean seven days after the physical 
cause of polkition had ceased. This was all that 
the law required : but in later times, when the 
Jews began to refine upon it, these cases were 
considered generic instead of specific — as repre- 
senting classes instead of individual cases of 
defilement — and the causes of pollution requiring 
purification by water thus came to be greatly in- 
creased. This kind of ablution for substantial 

uncleanness answers to the Moslem ijjulc ghash, 

in which the causes of defilement greatly exceed 
those of the Mosaicallaw, while they are perhaps 
equalled in number and minuteness by those 
which the later Jews devised. The uncleanness 



in this class arises chiefly from the natural secre- 
tions of human beings and of beasts used for 
food ; and from the ordure of animals not used 
for food ; and, as among the Jews, the defilement 
may be communicated not only to persons, but 
to clothes, utensils, and dwellings — in all which 
cases the purification must be made by water, o- 
by some representative act where water cannot be 

Of the last class of ablutions, by which persons 
declared themselves free from the guilt of a parti- 
cular action, the most remarkable instance is that 
which occurs in the expiation for an unknown 
murder, when the elders of the nearest village 
washed their hands over the expiatory heifer, be- 
headed in the valley, saying, ' Our hands have 
not shed this blood, neither have our eyes seen it ' 
(Deut. xxi. 1-9). It has been thought by some 
that the signal act of Pilate, when he washed his 
hands in water and declared himself innocent of 
the blood of Jesus (Matt, xxvii. 24), was a de- 
signed adoption of the Jewish custom : but this 
supposition does not appear necessary, as the 
custom was also common among the Greeks and 

We have confined this notice to the usages of 
ablution as a sign of purification sanctioned or 
demanded by the law itself. Other practices not 
there indicated appear to have existed at a very 
early period, or to have grown up in the course 
of time. From 1 Sam. xvi. 5, compared with 
Exod. xix. 10-14, we learn that it was usual for 
those who presented or provided a sacrifice to 
purify themselves by ablution : and as this was 
everywhere a general practice, it may be sup- 
posed to have existed in patriarchal times, and, 
being an established and approved custom, not 
to have required to be mentioned in the law. 
There is a passage in the apocryphal book of 
Judith (xii. 7-9) which has been thought to intimate 
that the Jews performed ablutions before prayer. 
But we cannot fairly deduce that meaning from 
it. It would indeed prove too much if so under- 
stood, as Judith bathed in the water, which is 
more than even the Moslems do before their 
prayers. Moreover, the authority, if clear, would 
not be conclusive. 

But after the rise of the sect of the Pharisees, 
the practice of ablution was carried to such ex- 
cess, from the affectation of excessive purity, that 
it is repeatedly brought under our notice in 
the New Testament through the severe animad- 
versions of our Saviour on the consummate hy- 
pocrisy involved in this fastidious attention to 
the external types of moral purity, while the 
heart was left unclean. All the practices there 
exposed come under the head of purification from 
uncleanness ; — the acts" involving which were 
made so numerous that persons of the stricter sect 
could scarcely move without contracting some 
involuntary pollution. For this reason they never 
entered their houses without ablution, from the 
strong probability that they had unknowingly 
contracted some defilement in the streets ; and 
they were especially careful never to eat without 
washing tire hands (Mark vii. 1-5), because 
they were peculiarly liable to be defiled ; and as 
unclean hands were held to communicate un- 
cleanness to all food (excepting fruit) which they 
touched, it was deemed that there was no secu- 
rity against eating unclean food but by alway3 



washing the hands ceremonially before touching 
any meat. We say ' ceremonially,' because 
this article refers only to ceremonial washing. 
The Israelites, who, like other Orientals, fed with 
their fingers, washed their hands before meals, 
for the sake of cleanliness [Washing]. But these 
customary washings were distinct from the cere- 
monial ablutions, as they are now among the Mos- 
lems. There were, indeed, distinct names for 
them. The former was called simply n? l| t03, or 
washing, in which water was. poured upon the 
hands; the latter was called TO''2'Q, plunging, be- 
cause the hands were plunged in water (Light- 
foot, on Mark vii. 4). It was this last, namely, the 
ceremonial ablution, which the Pharisees judged 
to be so necessary. When therefore some of that 
sect remarked that our Lord's disciples ate ' with 
unwashen hands ' (Mark vii. 2), it is not to be 
understood literally that they did not at all wash 
their hands, but that they did not plunge them 
ceremonially according to their own practice. 
And this was expected from them only as the 
disciples of a religious teacher ; for these refine- 
ments were not practised by the class of people 
from which the disciples were chiefly drawn. 
Their wonder was, that Jesus had not inculcated 
this observance on his followers, and not, as some 
have fancied, that he had enjoined them to neg- 
lect what had been their previous practice. 

In at least an equal degree the Pharisees mul- 
tiplied the ceremonial pollutions which required 
the ablution of inanimate objects — ' cups and 
pots, brazen vessels and tables ;' the rules given 
in the law (Lev. vi. 28 ; xi. 32-36 ; xv. 23) 
being extended to these multiplied contamina- 
tions. Articles of earthenware which were of 
little value were to be broken ; and those of 
metal and wood were to be scoured and rinsed 
with water. All these matters are fully described 
by Buxtorf, Lightfoot, Gill, and other writers 
of the same class, who present many striking 
illustrations of the passages of Scripture which 
refer to them. The Mohammedan usages of 
ablution, which offer many striking analogies, are 
fully detailed in the third book of the Mischat 
ul Masdbih, and also in D'Ohsson's Tableau, 
liv. i. chap. i. 

ABNAIM (Q?33X). This word is the dual 
of pX, a stone, and in this form only occ.urs twice, 
Exod. i. 16, and Jer. xviii. 3. In the latter passage 
it undeniably means a potter' s wheel ; but what 
it denotes in the former, or how to reconcile with 
the use of the word in the latter text any interpre- 
tation which can be assigned to it in the former, 
is .a question which (see Rosenmuller in loc.~) has 
mightily exercised the ingenuity and patience 
of critics and philologers. The meaning appears 
to have been doubtful even of old, and the ancient 
versions are much at variance. The LXX. evades 
the difficulty by the general expression orav Sicri 
irpbs rw t'iktzw, ' when they are about to be de- 
livered,' and is followed by the Vulgate, ' et partus 
tempus advenerit ;' but our version is more de- 
finite, and has ' and see them upon the stools.'' 
This goes upon the notion that the word denotes 
a particular kind of open stool or chair con- 
structed for the purpose of delivering pregnant 
women. The usages of the East do not, however, 
acquaint us with any such utensil, the employ- 
ment of which, indeed, is not in accordance with 

the simple manners of ancient times. Others, 
therefore, suppose the word to denote stone or 
other bathing troughs, in which it was usual to 
lave new-bom infants. This conjecture is so 
far probable, that the midwife, if inclined to 
obey the royal mandate, could then destroy the 
child without check or observation. Accordingly, 
this interpretation is preferred by Gesenius (The- 
saur. s. v. \2H), quoting in illustration The- 
venot (Itin. ii. 98), who states ' that the kings of 
Persia are so afraid of being deprived of that 
power which they abuse, and are so apprehensive 
of being dethroned, that they cause the male 
children of their female relations to be de- 
stroyed in the stone bathing-troughs in which 
newly-born children are laved.' The question, 
however, is not as to the existence of the 
custom, but its application to the case in view. 
Professor Lee treats the preceding opinions with 
little ceremony, and decides nearly in accordance 
with the LXX. and other ancient versions, none 
of which, as he remarks, say anything about 
wash-pots, stools, or the like. He then gives 
reasons for understanding the command of Pha- 
raoh thus : ' Observe, look carefully on the two 
occasions (i. e. in which either a male or -female 
child is bom). If it be a son, then,' &c. We 
may add that this is a subject on which some 
light may possibly be thrown at a future day 
by the monuments of Egypt, in which the an- 
cient manners of that country are so minutely 

ABNER ("inj? or "U^K, father of light; 
Sept. 'Af3evv7ip), the cousin of Saul (being the son 
of his uncle Ner), and the commander-in-chief of 
his army. He does not come much before us until 
after the death of Saul, b.c. 1056. Then, the expe- 
rience which he had acquired, and the character 
for ability and decision which he had established 
in Israel, enabled him to uphold the falling 
house of Saul for seven years ; and he might pro- 
bably have done so longer if it had suited his 
views. It was generally known that David had 
been divinely nominated to succeed Saul on the 
throne : when, therefore, that monarch was slain in 
the battle of Gilboa, David was made king over 
his own tribe of Judah, and reigned in Hebron. 
In the other tribes an influence adverse to Judah 
existed, and was controlled chiefly by the tribe 
of Ephraim. Abner, with great decision, availed 
himself of this state of feeling, and turned it to 
the advantage of the house to which he belonged, 
of which he was now the most important surviv- 
ing member. He did not, however, venture to 
propose himself as king ; but took Ishbosheth, 
a surviving son of Saul, whose known imbecility 
had excused his absence from the fatal fight in 
which his father and brothers perished, and made 
him king over the tribes, and ruled in his name. 
Ishbosheth reigned in Mahanaim, beyond Jordan, 
and David in Hebron. A sort of desultory 
warfare arose between them, in which the ad- 
vantage appears to have been always on the 
side of David. The only one of the engagements 
of which we have a particular account is that 
which ensued when Joab, David's general, and 
Abner, met and fought at Gibeon. Abner was 
beaten and fled for his life ; but was pursued 
by Asahel, the brother of Joab and Abishai, 
who was ' swift of foot as a wild roe.' Abner, 


dreading a blood-feud with Joab, for whom he 
seems to have entertained a sincere respect, en- 
treated Asahel to desist from the pursuit : but 
finding that he was still followed, and that his life 
was in danger, he at length ran his pursuer through 
the body by a back thrust with the pointed heel of 
his spear (2 Sam. ii. 8-32). This put a strife of 
blood between the two foremost men in all Israel 
(after David) ; for the law of honour which had 
from times before the law prevailed among the 
Hebrews, and which still prevails in Arabia, ren- 
dered it the conventional duty of Joab to avenge 
the blood of his brother upon the person by whom 
he had been slain [Bi.ood-Revenge]. 

As time went on, Abner had occasion to feel 
more strongly that he was himself not only the 
chief, but the only remaining prop of the house of 
Saul : and this conviction, acting upon a proud 
and arrogant spirit, led him to more presumptuous 
conduct than even the mildness of the feeble 
Ishbosheth could suffer to pass without question. 
He took to. his own harem a woman who had 
been a concubine-wife of Saul. This act, from 
the ideas connected with the harem of a deceased 
king [Harem], was not only a great impro- 
priety, but was open to the suspicion of a political 
design, which Abner may very possibly have en- 
tertained. A mild rebuke from the nominal king, 
however, enraged him greatly ; and he plainly 
declared that he would henceforth abandon his 
cause and devote himself to the interests of 
David. To excuse this desertion to his own 
mind, he then and on other occasions avowed his 
knowledge that the son of Jesse had been appointed 
by the Lord to reign over all Israel: but he 
appears to have been, unconscious that this avowal 
exposed his previous conduct to more censure than 
it offered excuse for his present. He, however, 
kept his word with Ishbosheth. After a tour, 
during which he explained his present views to 
the elders of the tribes which still adhered to the 
house of Saul, he repaired to Hebron with autho- 
rity to make certain overtures to David on their 
behalf. He was received with great attention 
and respect ; and David even thought it prudent 
to promise that he should still have the chief com- 
mand of the armies, when the desired union of 
the two kingdoms took place. The political ex- 
pediency of this engagement is very clear, and to 
that expediency the interests and claims of Joab 
were sacrificed. That distinguished personage 
happened to be absent from Hebron on service at 
the time, but he returned just as Abner had left 
the city. He speedily understood what had 
passed ; and his dread of the superior influence 
which such a man as Abner might establish with 
David, quickened his remembrance of the ven- 
geance which his brother's blood required. His 
purpose was promptly formed. Unknown to the 
king, but apparently in his name, he sent a 
message after Abner to call him back ; and as he 
returned, Joab met him at the gate, and, leading 
him aside, as if to confer peaceably and privately 
with him, suddenly thrust his sword into his body 
(b.c. 101S). The lamentations of David, the 
public mourning which he ordered, and the fu- 
neral honours which were paid to the remains of 
Abner, the king himself following the bier as chief 
mourner, exoneratedhim in public opinion from 
having been privy to this assassination. As for 
Joab, his privilege as a blood-avenger must to a 



great extent have justified his treacherous act in 
the opinion of the people ; and that, together with 
his influence with the army, screened him from 
punishment (2 Sam. iii. 6-39). 

For the following interesting elucidation of 
David's lament over Abner, we are indebted to a 
learned and highly valued contributor. 

[David's short but emphatic lament over Ab- 
ner (2 Sam. iii. 33) may be rendered, with stricter 
adherence to the form of the original, as fol- 
lows : — 

' Should Abner die as a villain dies ? — 
Thy hands — not bound, 
Thy feet — not brought into fetters : 
As one falls before the sons of wickedness, 
fellest thou ! ' 
As to the syntactical structure of these lines, it 
is important to observe that the second and third 
lines are two propositions of state belonging to 
the last, which describe the condition in which 
he was when he teas slain. This kind of propo- 
sition is marked by the subject being placed first, 
and by the verb generally becoming a. participle. 
On the right knowledge of this structure the 
beauty and sense of many passages altogether 
depend ; and the common ignorance of it is to 
be ascribed to the circumstance, that the study 
of Hebrew so very seldom reaches beyond the 
vocabulary into the deeper-seated peculiarities of 
its construction. (See Ewald's Ilebr. Gram. 
§ 556.) As to the sense of the words, J. D. Michaelis 
(in his Uebersetzung des Alien Test, mit Anmer- 
kungen fur Ungelehrte) saw that the point of 
this indignant, more than sorrowful, lament, 
lies in the mode in which Abner was slain. 
Joab professed to kill him ' for the blood of 
Asahel his brother,' 2 Sam. iii. 27. But if a 
man claimed his brother's blood at the hand of 
his murderer, the latter (even if he fled to the altar 
for refuge, Exod. xxi. 14) would have been deli- 
vered up (bound, hand and foot, it is assumed) 
to the avenger of blood, who would then possess 
a legal right to slay him. Now Joab not only 
had no title to claim the right of the Goel, as 
Asahel was killed under justifying circumstances 
(2 Sam. ii. 19) ; but, while pretending to exer- 
cise die avenger's right, he took a lawless and 
private mode of satisfaction, and committed a 
murder. Hence David charged him, in allusion 
to this conduct, with ' shedding the blood of war 
in peace' (1 Kings H. 5) ; and hence he expresses 
himself in this lament, as if indignant that 
the noble Abner, instead of being surrendered 
with the formalities of the law to meet an 
authorized penalty, was treacherously stabbed 
like a worthless fellow by the hands of an 
assassin. — J. N.] 

ABNET (033X). As this word can be traced 
to no root in the Hebrew language, and as it 
occurs in the narrative immediately alter the 
departure from Egypt, it is reasonably supposed 
by Professor Lee to be Egyptian, in opposition 
however to Hottinger, who refers it to the Persic, 
and to Gesenius, who finds it in the Sanscrit. It 
means a. band, a bandage ; and from the places 
in which it occurs, it appears to have been made 
of fine linen variously wrought, and used to bind 
as a girdle about the body of persons in authority 
especially the Jewish priests f^Exod. xxix. 9 ; 
xxviii. 39 ; xxxix. 29 ; Lev. viii. 13 ; La. xxii. 

c 2 



21). These girdles may be considered as fairly 
represented by those which we observe on such 
persons in the Egyptian paintings. 

ABOMINATION (Tiagta and ynffi ; Sept. 
and New Test. — e.g. Matt. xxiv. 15 — ^eKvy/na, 
for both). These words describe generally any 
object of detestation or disgust (Lev. xviii. 22 ; 
Deut. vii. 25) ; and are applied to an impure or 
detestable action (Ezek. xxii. 11; xxx. 26; Mai. 
ii. 11, &c); to anything causing a ceremonial 
pollution (Gen. xliii. 32 ; xlvi. 34 ; Deut. xiv. 3) ; 
but more especially to idols (Lev. xviii. 22 ; xx. 
13 ; Deut. vii. 26 ; 1 Kings xi. 5, 7 ; 2 Kings 
xxiii. 13) ; and also to food offered to idols (Zech. 
ix. 7) ; and to filth of every kind (Nahum iii. 6). 
There are two or three of the texts in which the 
word occurs, to which, on account of their peculiar 
interest or difficult}', especial attention has been 
drawn. The fifst is Gen. xliii. 32 : 'The Egyp- 
tians might not eat bread with the Hebrews ; 
for that is an abomination (nnVlfl) unto the 
Egyptians.' This is best explained by the fact 
that the Egyptians considered themselves cere- 
monially denied if they ate with any strangers. 
The primary reason appears to have been that the 
cow was the most sacred animal among the Egyp- 
tians, and the eating of it was abhorrent to them ; 
whereas it was both eaten and sacrificed by the 
Jews and most other nations, who on that account 
were abominable in their eyes. It was for this, as 
we learn from Herodotus (ii. 41), that no Egyptian 
man or woman would kiss a Greek on the mouth, 
or would use the cleaver of a Greek, or his spit, or 
his dish, or would taste the flesh of even clean beef 
(that is, of oxen) that had been cut with a Grecian 
carving-knife. It is true that Sir J. G. Wilkinson 
{Anc. Egyptians, iii. 358) ascribes this to the re- 
pugnance of the fastidiously clean Egyptians to 
the comparatively foul habits of their Asiatic and 
other neighbours : but it seems scarcely fair to 
take the facts of the father of history, and ascribe 


to them any other than the very satisfactory reason 
which he assigns. We collect then that it was 
as foreigners, not pointedly as Hebrews, that it 
was an abomination for the Egyptians to eat with 
the brethren of Joseph. The Jews themselves 
subsequently exemplified the same practice ; for 
in later times they held it unlawful to eat or 
drink with foreigners in thejr houses, or even to 
enter their houses (John xviii. 28 ; Acts x. 28 ; 
xi. 3) ; for not only were the houses of Gentiles 
unclean (Mishn. Oholoth. 18, § 7), but they them- 
selves rendered unclean those in whose houses 
they lodged (Maimon. Mishcab a. Morheb, c. 
12, § 12); which was carrying the matter a step 
further than the Egyptians (see also Mitzvoth 
Tora, pr. 148). We do not however trace these 
examples before the Captivity. 

The second passage is Gen. xlvi. 34. Joseph 
is telling his brethren how to conduct them- 
selves when introduced to the king of Egypt ; 
and he instructs them that when asked concern- 
ing their occupation they should answer : ' Thy 
servants' trade hath been about cattle from our 
youth even until now, both we and also our 
fathers? This last clause has emphasis, as show- 
ing that they were hereditary nomade pastors ; 
and the reason is added : ' That ye may dwell in 
the land of Goshen,— for every shepherd is an 
abomination unto the Egyptians.' In the former 
instance they were 'an abomination ' as strangers, 
with whom the Egyptians could not eat ; here they 
are a further abomination as nomade shepherds, 
whom it was certain that the Egyptians, for that 
reason, would locate in the border land of Goshen, 
and not in the heart of the country. That it was 
nomade shepherds, or Bedouins, and not simply 
shepherds, who were abominable to the Egyptians, 
is evinced by the fact that the Egyptians them- 
selves paid great attention to the rearing of cattle. 
This is shown by their sculptures and paintings, 
as well as bv i he offer of this very king of Egypt 
to make suca of Jacob's sons as were men of 
activity ' overseers of his cattle ' (xlvii. 6). For 
this aversion to nomade pastors two reasons are 
given ; and it is not necessary that we should choose 
between them, for both of them were, it is most 
likely, concurrently true. One is, that the inhabit- 
ants of Lower and Middle Egypt had previously 
been invaded by, and had remained for many years 
subject to, a tribe of nomade shepherds [Egypt], 
who had only of late been expelled, and a native 
dynasty restored — the grievous oppression of the 
Egyptians by these pastoral invaders, and the in- 
sult with which their religion had been treated. The 
other reason, not necessarily superseding the former, 
but rather strengthening it, is, that the Egyptians, 
as a settled and civilized people, detested the law- 
less and predatory habits of the wandering shep- 
herd tribes, which then, as now, bounded the val- 
ley of the Nile, and occupied the Arabias. Their 
constantly aggressive operations upon the frontiers, 
and upon all the great lines of communication, 
must, with respect to them, have given intensity to 
the odium with which all strangers were regarded. 
If any proof of this were wanting, it is found in 
the fact (attested by the Rev. R. M. Macbriar 
and others) that, sunk as Modern Egypt is, there 
is still such a marked and irreconcilable differ- 
ence of ideas and habits between the inhabitanta 
and the Bedouins, whose camps are often in the 
near neighbourhood of their towns and villages, 


that the latter are regarded with dislike and fear, 
and no friendly intercourse exists between them. 
We know that the same state of feeling prevails 
between the settled inhabitants and the Bedouins 
along the Tigris and Euphrates. 

The third marked use of this word again occurs 
in Egypt. The king tells the Israelites to offer to 
their god the sacrifices which they desired, with-* 
out going to the desert for that pmpose. To which 
Moses objects, that they should have to sacrifice to 
the Lord ' the abomination of the Egyptians,' 
who would thereby be highly exasperated against 
them (Exod. viii. 25, 26). A reference back to 
the first explanation shows that this ' abomination' 
was the cow, the only animal which all the Egyp- 
tians agreed in holding sacred ; whereas, in the 
great sacrifice which the Hebrews proposed to 
hold, not only would heifers be offered, but the 
people would feast upon their flesh. 

The Abomination of Desolation. In 
Dan. ix. 27, D»B>» MpW; literally, ' the abomi- 
nation of the desolater, which, without doubt, 
means the idol or idolatrous, apparatus which the 
desolater of Jerusalem should establish in the holy 
place. This appears to have been a prediction of 
the pollution of the temple by Antiochus Epiphanes, 
who caused an idolatrous altar to be built on the 
altar of burnt offerings, whereon unclean things 
were offered to Jupiter Olympius, to whom the 
temple itself was dedicated. Josephus distinctly 
refers to this as the accomplishment of Daniel's 
prophecy ; as does the author of the first book of 
Maccabees, in declaring that ' they set up the abo- 
mination of desolation upon the altar' CxlK0^6jJ.7\(TaV 

rb fiSeAvy/xa ti}s ipri/JLcicreccs iirl rb dvcriacrT^pioy 
(1 Mace. i. 59 ; vi. 7 ; 2 Mace. vi. 2-5 ; Joseph. 
Antiq. xii. 5, 4 ; xii. 7, -6). The phrase is quoted by 
Jesus, in the form of rb /35eAvy/xa ttjs ipr\ /never ecus 
(Mitt. xxiv. 15), and is applied by him to 
v. it was to take place at the advance of the 
Romans against Jerusalem. They who saw ' the 
abomination of desolation standing in the holy 
place' were enjoined to ' flee to the mountains.' 
And this may with probability be referred to the 
advance of the Roman army against the city with 
their image-crowned standards, to which idolatrous 
honours were paid, and which the Jews regarded 
as idols. The unexpected retreat and discom- 
fiture of the Roman forces afforded such as were 
mindful of our Saviour's prophecy an opportunity 
of obeying the injunction which it contained. 
That the Jews themselves regarded the Roman 
standards as abominations is shown by the fact 
that, in deference to their known aversion, the Ro- 
man soldiers quartered in Jerusalem forbore to 
introduce their standards into the city : and on 
one occasion, when Pilate gave orders that they 
should be carried in by night, so much stir was 
made in the matter by the principal inhabitants, 
that for the sake of peace the governor was event- 
ually induced to give up the point (Joseph. An- 
tiq. xviii. 3, 1). Those however who suppose 
that ' the holy place' of the text must be the 
temple itself, may find the accomplishment of the 
prediction in the fact that, when the city had been 
taken by theRomans, and the holy house destroyed, 
the soldiers brought their standards in due form to 
the temple, set them up over the eastern gate, and 
offered sacrifice to them (Joseph. Bell. Jud. vi. 
<), 1) ; for (as Havercamp judiciously notes frond 
Tertullian, Apol. c. xvi. 162) ' almost the entire 



religion of the Roman camp consisted in worship- 
ping the ensigns, swearing by the ensigns, and 
in preferring the ensigns before all the other gods.' 

Nor was this the last appearance of ' the abomi- 
nation of desolation, in the holy place :' for, not 
only did Hadrian, with studied insult to the Jews, 
set up the figure of a boar over the Bethlehem gate 
of the city (iElia Capitolina) which rose upon 
the site and ruins of Jerusalem (Euseb. Chron. 
1. i. p. 45, ed. 165S), but he erected a temple to 
Jupiter upon the site of the Jewish temple (Dion 
Cass. lxix. 12), and caused an image of him- 
self to be set up in the part which answered to 
the most holy place (Nicephorus Callist., iii. 24). 
This was a consummation of all the abominations 
which the iniquities of the Jews brought upon 
their holy place. 

ABRAHAM (DiTOS, father of a multi- 
tude; Sept. 'Afipadp.), the founder of the Hebrew 
nation. Up to Gen. xvii. 4, 5, he is uniformly 
called Abram (D"UN, father of elevation, or 
high father ; Sept. "Aj8po/x), and this was his ori- 
ginal name; but the extended form, which it 
always afterwards bears, was given to it to make it 
significant of the promise of a numerous posterity 
which was at the same time made to him. 

Abraham was a native of Chaldea, and de- 
scended, through Heber, in the ninth generation, 
from Shem the son of Noah. His father was Terah, 
who had two other sons, Nahor and Haran. Haran 
died prematurely 'before his father,' leaving a son 
Lot, and two daughters, Milcah and Iscah. Lot 
attached himself to his uncle Abraham; Milcah 
became the wife of her uncle Nahor; and Iscali, 
who was also called Sarai, became the wife of 
Abraham (Gen. xi. 26-29: comp. Joseph. Antiq. 
i. 6, 5) [Iscah]. 

Abraham was born a.m. 200S, B.C. 1996 
(Hales, a.m. 325S, b.c. 2153), in 'Urol' the Chal- 
dees' (Gen. xi. 28). The concise history in 
Genesis states nothing concerning the portion of 




his life prior to the age of 60; and respecting' 
a person living in times so remote no authentic 
information can be derived from any other source. 
There are indeed traditions, but they are too 
manifestly built up on the foundation of a few 
obscure intimations in Scripture to be entitled to 
any credit. Thus it is intimated in Josh. xxiv. 
2, that Terah and his family 'served other gods' 
beyond the Euphrates : and on this lias been 
founded the romance that Terah was not only a 
worshipper, but a maker of idols ; that the youthful 
Abraham, discovering the futility of such gods, . 
destroyed all those his father had made, and jus- 
tified the act in various conversations and argu- 
ments with Terah, which we find repeated at 
length. Again, ' Ur of the Chaldees' was the 
name of the place where Abraham was born, and 
from which he went forth to go, he knew not whi- 
ther, at the call of God. Now Ur ("1-1 X) means 
fire; and we may therefore read that he came 
forth from the fire of the Chaldees; on which has 
been built the story that Abraham was, for his 
disbelief in the established idols, cast by king 
Nimrod into a burning furnace, from which he 
was by special miracle delivered. And to this 
the premature death of Haran has suggested the 
addition that he, by way of punishment for his 
disbelief of the truths for which Abraham suffered, 
was marvellously destroyed by the same fire from 
which his brother was still more marvellously 
preserved. Again, the fact that Chaldea was the 
region in which astronomy was reputed to have 
been first cultivated, suggested that Abraham 
brought astronomy westward, and that he even 
taught that science to the Egyptians (Joseph. 
Antiq. i. 8). These are goodly specimens of tradi- 
tion-building; and more of them may be found 
in the alleged history of Abraham by those who 
think them worth the trouble of the search. It is 
just to Josephus to state that most of these stories 
are rejected by him, although the tone of some of 
his remarks is in agreement with them. 

Although Abraham is, by way of eminence, 
named first, it appears probable that he was the 
youngest of Terah' s sons, and born by a second wife, 
when his father was lilO A^ears old. Terah was 
seventy years old when the eldest son was bom 
(Gen. xi. 32; xii. 4; xx. 12: comp. Hales, ii. 
107); and that eldest son appears to have beon 
Haran, from the fact that his brothers married his 
daughters, and that his daughter Sarai was only 
ten years younger than his brother Abraham (Gen. 
xvii. 17). It is shown by Hales (ii. 107), that 
Abraham was 60 years old when the family 
quitted their native city of Ur, and went and 
abode in Charran. The reason for this movement 
does not appear in the Old Testament. Josephus 
alleges that Terah could not bear to remain in 
the place where Haran had died (Antiq. i. 6. 5); 
while the apocryphal book of Judith, in con- 
formity with the traditions still current among the 
Jews and Moslems, affirms that they were cast 
forth because they would no longer worship the 
gods of the land (Judith v. 6-8). The real cause 
transpires in Acts vii. 2-4: 'The God of glory 
appeared to our father Abraham while he was (at 
Ur of the Chaldees) in Mesopotamia, before he 
dwelt in Charran, and said unto him, Depart from 
thy land, and from thy kindred, and come hither 
to a land (yriv) which I will shew thee. Then 
departing from the land of the Chaldees, he dwelt 

in Charran.' This first call is not recorded, but 
only implied in Gen. xii. : and it is distinguished 
by several pointed circumstances from the second, 
which alone is there mentioned. Accordingly 
Abraham departed, and his family, including his 
aged father, removed with him. They proceeded 
not at once to the land of Canaan, which in- 
deed had not been yet indicated to Abraham 
as his destination; but they came to Charran, 
and tarried at that convenient station for fif- 
teen current years, until Terah died, at the age of 
205 years. Being free from his filial duties, 
Abraham, now 75 years of age, received a second 
and more pointed call to pursue his destination : 
'Depart from thy 'land, and from thy kindred, and 
from thy father's house, unto the land (l-'IKH, 
ry\v jrtv), which I will shew thee' (Gen. xii. 1). 
The difference of the two calls is obvious : in the 
former the land is indefinite, being designed only 
for a temporary residence ; in the latter it is definite, 
intimating a permanent abode. A third condition 
was also annexed to the latter call, that he should 
separate from his father's house, and leave his 
brother Nahor's family behind him in ChaiTan. 
This must have intimated to him that the Divine 
call was personal to himself, and required that he 
should be isolated not only from his nation, but 
from his family. He however took with him his 
nephew Lot, whom, having no children of his 
own, he appears to have regarded as his heir, and 
then went forth 'not knowing whither he went' 
(Heb. xi. 8), but trusting implicitly to the Divine 
guidance. And it seems to have been the inten- 
tion of Him by whom he had been called, to open 
gradually to him the high destinies which awaited 
him and his race, as we perceive that every suc- 
cessive communication with which he was fa- 
voured rendered more sure and definite to him 
the objects for which he had been called from the 
land of his birth. 

No particulars of the journey are given. Abra-- 
ham arrived in the land of Canaan, which he 
found occupied by the Canaanites in a large 
number of small independent communities, which 
cultivated the districts around their several towns. 
The country was however but thinly peopled ; 
and, as in the more recent times of its depopula- 
tion, it afforded ample pasture-grounds for the 
wandering pastors. One of that class Abraham 
must have appeared in their eyes. In Mesopo- 
tamia the family had been pastoral, but dwelling 
in towns and houses, and sending out the flocks 
and herds under the care of shepherds. But the 
migratory life to which Abraham had now been 
called, compelled him to take to the tent-dwelling 
as well as the pastoral life : and the usages which 
his subsequent history indicates are therefore found 
to present a condition of manners and habits 
analogous to that which still exists among the 
nomade pastoral, or Bedouin tribes of south-west- 
ern Asia. 

The rich pastures in that part of the country 
tempted Abraham to form his first encampment 
in the vale of Moreh, which lies between the 
mountains of Ebal and Gerizim. Here the strong 
faith which had brought the childless man thus 
far from his home was rewarded by the grand 
promise: — 'I will make of thee a great nation, 
and I will bless thee and make thy name great, 
and thou shalt be a blessing ; and I will bless 
them that bless thee, and curse them that curse 


thee : and in thee shall all the families of the 
earth be blessed ' (Gen. xii. 2, 3). It was further 
promised that to his posterity shoidd be given the 
rich heritage of that beautiful country into which 
he had come (v. 7). It will be seen that this 
important promise consisted of two parts, the 
.one temporal, the other spiritual. The temporal 
was the promise of posterity, that he should 
be blessed himself, and be the founder of a 
great nation ; the spiritual, that he should be 
the chosen ancestor of the Redeemer, who had 
been of old obscurely predicted (Gen. iii. 15), 
and thereby become the means of blessing all 
the families of the earth. The implied con- 
dition on his part was, that he should publicly 
profess the worship of the true God in this more 
tolerant land ; and accordingly ' he built there 
an altar unto the Lord, who appeared unto him.' 
He soon after removed to the district between 
Bethel and Ai, where he also built an altar to that 
' Jehovah ' whom the world was then hastening 
to forget. His farther removals tended southward, 
until at length a famine in Palestine compelled 
him to withdraw into Egypt, where com abounded. 
Here his apprehension that the beauty of his wife 
Sarai might bring him into danger with the dusky 
Egyptians, overcame his faith and rectitude, and 
he gave out that she was his sister. As he had 
feared, the beauty of the fair stranger excited the 
admiration of the Egyptians, and at length 
reached the ears of the king, who forthwith ex- 
ercised his regal right of calling her to his harem, 
and to this Abraham, appearing as only her brother, 
was obliged to submit. As, however, the king had 
no intention to act harshly in the exercise of his 
privilege, he loaded Abraham with valuable gifts, 
suited to his condition, being chiefly in slaves 
and cattle. These presents could not have been 
refused by him without an insult which, under 
all the circumstances, the king did not deserve. A 
grievous disease inflicted onPharaoh and his house- 
hold relieved Sarai from her danger, by revealing 
to the king that she was a married woman ; on 
which he sent for Abraham, and, after rebuking 
him for his conduct, restored his wife to him, and 
recommended him to withdraw from the country. 
He accordingly returned to the land of Canaan, 
much richer than when he left it ' in cattle, in 
silver, and in gold ' (Gen. xii. 8 ; xiii. 2). 

Lot also had much increased his possessions : 
and soon after their return to their previous sta- 
tion near Bethel, the disputes between their re- 
spective shepherds about water and pasturage 
soon taught them that they had better separate. 
The recent promise of posterity to Abraham him- 
self, although his wife had been accounted "barren, 
probably tended also in some degree to weaken the 
tie by which the uncle and nephew had hitherto 
been united. The subject was broached by Abra- 
ham, who generously conceded to Lot the choice 
of pasture-grounds. Lot chose the well-watered 
plain in which Sodom and other towns were situ- 
ated, and removed thither [Lot]. Thus was ac- 
complished the dissolution of a connection which 
had been formed before the promise of children 
was given, and the disruption of which appears to 
have been necessary for that complete isolation of 
the coming race which the Divine purpose re- 
quired. Immediately afterwards the patriarch 
was cheered and encouraged by a more distinct 
and formal reiteration of the promises which had 



e been previously made to him, of the occupation 
of the land in which he lived by a posterity nu- 
merous as the dust. Not long after, he removed 
to the pleasant valley of Mamre, in the neigh- 
bourhood of Hebron (then called Arba), and 
pitched his tent under a terebinth tree (Gen. xiii.). 
It appears that fourteen years before this time 
the south and east of Palestine had been invaded 
by a king called Chedorlaomer, from beyond the 
Euphrates, who brought several of the small dis- 
united states of those quarters under tribute. 
Among them were the five cities of the Plain of 
Sodom, to which Lot had withdrawn. This burden 
was bome impatiently by these states, and they 
at length withheld their tribute. This brought 
upon them a ravaging visitation from Chedorla- 
omer and four other (perhaps tributary) kings, who 
scoured the whole country east of the Jordan, and 
ended by defeating the kings of the plain, plun- 
dering their towns, and carrying the people away 
as slaves. Lot was among the sufferers. When 
this came to the ears of Abraham, he immediately 
armed such of his slaves as were fit for war, in 
number 318, and being joined by the friendly 
Amoritish chiefs, Aner, Eshcol, and Mamre, pur- 
sued the retiring invaders. They were overtaken 
near the springs of the Jordan ; and their camp 
being attacked on opposite sides by night, they 
were thrown into disorder, and fled. Abraham 
and his men pursued them as far as the neigh- 
bourhood of Damascus, and then returned with all 
the men and goods which had been taken away. 
Although Abraham had no doubt been chiefly 
induced to undertake this exploit by his regard 
for Lot, it involved so large a benefit, that, as the 
act of a sojourner, it must have tended greatly to 
enhance the character and power of the patriarch 
in the view of the inhabitants at large. In fact, we 
afterwards find him treated by them with high 
respect and consideration. When they had ar- 
rived as far as Salem on their return, the king of 
that place, Melchizedek, who was one of the few 
native princes, if not the only one, who retained 
the knowledge and worship of ' the Most High 
God,' whom Abraham served, came forth to meet 
them with refreshments, in acknowledgment for 
which, and in recognition of his character, Abra- 
ham presented him with a tenth of the spoils. By 
strict right, founded on the war usages which still 
subsist in Arabia (Burckhardt's Notes, p. 97), 
the recovered goods became the property of Abra- 
ham, and not of those to whom the) r originally 
belonged. This was acknowledged by the king 
of Sodom, who met the victors in the valley near 
Salem. He said, ' Give me the persons, and 
keep the goods to thyself. 1 But with becoming 
pride, and with a disinterestedness which in that 
country would now be most unusual in similar 
circumstances, he answered, ' I have lifted up 
mine hand [i. e. I have sworn] unto Jehovah, the 
most high Godjthat I will not take from a thread 
even to a sandal-thong, and that I will not take 
any thing that is thine, lest thou shouldest say, 
I have made Abrani rich'' (Gen. xiv.). 

Soon after Iris return to Mamie the faith of 
Abraham was rewarded and encouraged, not only 
by a more distinct and detailed repetition of the 
promises formerly made to Mm, but by the con- 
firmation of a solemn covenant contracted, as 
nearly as might be, ' after the maimer of men ' 
[Covenant] between him and God. It was now 




that he first understood that his promised posterity 
were to grow up into a nation under foreign bond- 
age ; and that, in 400 years after (or, strictly, 
405 years, coimting from the birth of Isaac to 
the Exode), they should come forth from that 
bondage as a nation, to take possession of the 
land in which he sojourned (Gen. xiv.). 

After ten years' residence in Canaan (b.c. 1913), 
Sarai, being then 75 years old, and having long 
been accounted ban-en, chose to put her own in- 
terpretation upon the promised blessing of a pro- 
geny to Abraham, and persuaded him to take 
her woman-slave Hagar, an Egyptian, as a se- 
condary or concubine-wife, with the view that 
whatever child might proceed from this union 
should be accounted her own [Hagar]. The 
son who was bom to Abraham by Hagar, and who 
received the name of -Ishmael [Ishmael], was ac- 
cordingly brought up as the heir of his father and 
of the promises (Gen. xvi.). Thirteen years after 
(b.c. 1900), when Abraham was 99 years old, he 
was favoured with still more explicit declarations 
of the Divine purposes. He was reminded that 
the promise to him was that he should be the 
father of many nations ; and to indicate this in- 
tention his name was now changed (as before de- 
scribed) from Abram to Abraham. The Divine 
Being then solemnly renewed the covenant to be a 
God to him and to the race that should spring from 
him ; and in token of that covenant directed that he 
and his should receive in their flesh the sign of cir- 
cumcision [Circumcision]. Abundant blessings 
were promised to Ishmael ; but it was then first an- 
nounced, in distinct terms, that the heir of the spe- 
cial promises was not yet bom, and that the barren 
Sarai, then 90 years old, should twelve months 
thence be his mother. Then also her name was 
changed from Sarai to Sarah (theprincess) ; and to 
commemorate the laughter with which the prostrate 
patriarch received such strange tidings, it was di- 
rected that the name of Isaac (he laughed) should 
be given to the future child. The very same 
day, in obedience to the Divine ordinance, Abra- 
ham himself, his son Ishmael, and his house- 
bom and purchased slaves were all circumcised 
(Gen. xvii.). 

Three months after this, as Abraham sat in his 
tent door during the heat of the day, he saw three 
travellers approaching, and hastened to meet them, 
and hospitably pressed upon them refreshment 
and rest. They assented, and under the shade of 
a terebinth tree partook of the abundant fare 
which the patriarch and his wife provided, while 
Abraham himself stood by in respectful attend- 
ance. From the manner in which one of the 
strangers spoke, Abraham soon gathered that his 
visitants were no other than the Lord himself and 
two attendant angels in human form. The pro- 
mise of a son by Sarah was renewed ; and when 
Sarah herself, who overheard this within the tent, 
laughed inwardly at the tidings, whfch, on account 
of her great age, she at first disbelieved, she in- 
curred the striking rebuke, ' Is any thing too hard 
for Jehovah V The strangers then addressed them- 
selves to their journey, and Abraham walked some 
way with them. The two angels went forward 
in the direction of Sodom, while the Lord made 
known to him that, for their enormous iniquities, 
Sodom and the other ' cities of the plain' were 
about to be made signal monuments of his wrath 
an:! of his moral government. Moved by com- 

, passion and by remembrance of Lot, the patriarch 
ventured, reverently but perseveringly, to intercede 
for the doomed Sodom ; and at length obtained a 
promise that, if but ten righteous men were found 
therein, the whole city should be saved for their sake. 
Early the next morning Abraham arose to ascertain 
the result of this concession : and when he looked 
towards Sodom, the smoke of its destruction, rising 
' like the smoke of a furnace,' made known to him 
its terrible overthrow [Sodom]. He probably 
soon heard of Lot's escape : but the consternation 
which this event inspired in the neighbourhood 
induced him, almost immediately after, to remove 
farther off into the territories of Abimelech, king 
of Gerar. By a most extraordinary infatuation 
and lapse of faith, Abraham allowed himself to 
stoop to the same mean and foolish prevarication 
in denying his wife, which, twenty-three years be- 
fore, had occasioned him so much trouble inEgypt. 
The result was also similar [Abimilech], except 
that Abraham answered to the rebuke of the Phi- 
listine by stating the fears by which he had been 
actuated — adding, 'And yet indeed, she is my 
sister ; she is the daughter of my father, but not 
the daughter of my mother ; and she became my 
wife.' This mends the matter very little, since in 
calling her Ins sister he designed to be understood 
as saying she was not his wife. Ajs he elsewhere 
calls Lot his ' brother,' this statement that Sarah 
was his ' sister ' does not interfere with the proba- 
bility that she was his niece. 

The same year * Sarah gave birth to the long- 
promised son, and, according to previous direc- 
tion, the name of Isaac was given to him [Isaac]. 
This greatly altered the position of Ishmael, wha 
had hitherto appeared as the heir both of the tem- 
poral and the spiritual heritage ; whereas he had 
now to share the former, and could not but know 
that the latter was limited to Isaac. This ap- 
pears to have created much ill-feeling both on Ins 
part and that of his mother towards the child; 
which was in some way manifested so pointedly, 
on occasion of the festivities which attended, the 
weaning, that the wrath of Sarah was awakened, 
and she insisted that both Hagar and her son 
should be sent awa) r . This was a very hard mat- 
ter to a loving father; and Abraham was so much 
pained that he would probably have refused com- 
pliance with Sarah's wish, had he not been ap- 
prised in a dream that it was in accordance with 
the Divine intentions respecting both Ishmael and 
Isaac. With his habitual uncompromising obe- 
dience, he then hastened them away early in the 
morning, with provision for the journey. Their 
adventures belong to the article Hagar. 

Wheh Isaac was about 20 years old (b.c. 1 872) 
it pleased God to subject the faith of Abraham 
to a severer trial than it had yet sustained, or that 
has ever fallen to the lot of any other mortal man. 
He was commanded to go into the mountainous 
country of Moriah (probably where the temple after- 
wards stood), and there offer up in sacrifice the son 
of his affection, and the heir of so many hopes and 

* It is, however, supposed by some biblical 
critics that the preceding adventure with Abime- 
lech is related out of its order, and took place at 
an earlier date. Their chief reason is that Sarah 
was now 90 years of age. But the very few years 
by which such a supposition might reduce this 
age, seem scarcely worth the discussion [Sarah]. 


promises, which his death must nullify. It is pro- 
bable that human sacrifices already existed ; and 
as, when they did exist, the offering of an only 
or beloved child was considered the most merito- 
rious, it may have seemed reasonable to Abraham 
that he should not withhold from his own God the 
costly sacrifice which the heathen offered to their 
idols. The trial and peculiar difficulty iay in the 
singular position of Isaac, and in the unlikelihood 
that his loss could be supplied. But Abraham's 
'faith shrunk not, assured that what God had pro- 
mised he would certainly perform, and that he was 
able to restore Isaac to him even from the dead' 
(Heb. xii. 17-19), and he rendered a ready, however 
painful, obedience. Assisted by two of his ser- 
vants, he prepared wood suitable for the purpose, 
and without delay set out upon his melancholy 
journey. On the third day he descried the ap- 
pointed place ; and informing his attendants that 
he and his son would go some distance farther to 
worship, and then return, he proceeded to the spot. 
To the touching question of his son respecting the 
victim to be offered, the patriarch replied by express- 
ing bis faith that God himself would provide the 
sacrifice ; and probably he availed himself of this 
opportunity of acquainting him with the Divine 
command. At least, that the communication was 
made either then or just after is unquestionable ; 
for no one can suppose that a young man of twenty- 
five could, against his will, have been bound with 
cords and laid out as a victim on the wood of the 
altar. Isaac would most certainly have been slain 
by his father's uplifted hand, had not the angel of 
Jehovah interposed at the critical moment to arrest 
the fatal stroke. A ram which had become en- 
tangled in a thicket was seized and offered ; and 
a name was given to the place (IINT' mrp, 
Jehovah-Jireh — 'the Lord will provide') allusive 
to the believing answer which Abraham had given 
to his son's inquiry respecting the victim. The 
promises before made to Abraham — of numerous 
descendants, superior in power to their enemies, 
and of the blessings which his spiritual progeny, 
and especially the Messiah, were to extend to all 
mankind— were -again confirmed in the most so- 
lemn manner ; for Jehovah swore by himself 
(comp. Heb. vi. 13, 17), that such should be the 
rewards of his uncompromising obedience. The 
father and son then rejoined their servants, and re- 
turned rejoicing to Beersheba (Gen. xxi. 19). 

Eight years after (b.c. I860) Sarah died at 
the age of 120 years, being then at or near 
Hebron. This loss first taught Abraham the ne- 
cessity of acquiring possession of a family sepul- 
chre in the land of his sojourning. His choice 
fell on the cave of Machpelah [Machpej.ah], and 
after a striking negotiation with the owner in the 
gate of Hebron, he purchased it, and had it legally 
secured to him, with the field in which it stood 
and the trees that grew thereon. This was the 
only possession he ever had in the Land of Pro- 
mise (Gen. xxiii.). The next care of Abraham 
was to provide a suitable wii'e for his son Isaac. 
It has always been the practice among pastoral 
tribes to keep up the family ties by intermarriages 
of blood-rekitions (Burckharclt, Notes, p. 154) : and 
now Abraham had a further inducement in the 
desire to maintain the purity of the separated race 
from foreign and idolatrous connections. He there- 
fore sent his aged and confidential steward Elie- 
zer, under the bond of a solemn oath to discharge 



his mission faithfully, to renew the intercourse be- 
tween his family and that of his brother Nahor, 
whom he had left behind in Charran. He pros- 
pered in his important mission [Isaac], and in 
due time returned, bringing with him Rebekah, 
the daughter of Nahor's son Bethuel, who became 
the wife of Isaac, and was installed as chief lady 
of the camp, in the separate tent which Sarah had 
occupied (Gen. xxiv.). Some time after Abraham 
himself took a wife named Keturah, by whom he 
had several children. These, together with Ish- 
mael, seem to have been portioned off by their 
father in his lifetime, and sent into the east and 
south-east, that there might be no danger of their 
interference with Isaac, the divinely appointed heir. 
There was time for this : for Abraham lived to 
the age of 175 years, 100 of which he had spent 
in the land of Canaan. He died in b.c. 1822 
(Hales, 197S), and was buried by his two eldest 
sons in the family sepulchre which he had pur- 
chased of the Hittites (Gen. xxv. 1-10). 

ABRAHAM'S BOSOM. There was no name 
which conveyed to the Jews the same associations 
as that of Abraham. As undoubtedly he was in 
the highest state of felicity of which departed 
spirits are capable, ' to be with Abraham ' im- 
plied the enjoyment of the same felicity ; and 'to 
be in Abraham's bosom ' meant to be in repose 
and happiness with him. The latter phrase is 
obviously derived from the custom of sitting or 
reclining at table which prevailed among the Jews 
in and before the time of Christ [Accubation]. 
By this arrangement, the head of one person was 
necessarily brought almost into the bosom of the one 
who sat above him, or at the top of the triclinium ; 
and the guests were so arranged that the most 
favoured were placed so as to bring them into 
that situation with resrject to the host (comp. John 
xiii. 23 ; xxi. 20). These Jewish images and 
modes of thought are amply illustrated by Light- 
foot, Schoettgen, and Wetstein, who illustrate 
Scripture from Rabbinical sources. It was quite 
usual to describe a just person as being with 
Abraham, or lying on Abraham's bosom ; and as 
such images were unobjectionable, Jesus accom- 
modated his speech to them, to render himself 
the more intelligible by familiar notions, when, in 
the beautiful parable of the rich man and Lazarus, 
he describes the condition of the latter after death 
under these conditions (Luke xvi. 22, 23). 

ABRECH 01~OK). This word occurs only 
in Gen. xli. 43, where it is used in proclaiming 
the authority of Joseph. Something similar 
happened in the case of Mordecai ; but then 
several words were employed (Esth. vi. 11). If 
the word be Hebrew, it is probably an impera- 
tive of T|"13 in Hiphil, and would then mean, as 
in our version, ' bow the knee !' We are indeed 
assured by Wilkinson (Anc. Egyptians, ii. 21) 
that the word abrek is used to the present day 
by the Arabs, -when requiring a camel to kneel 
and receive its load. But Luther and others sup- 
pose the word to be a compound of TJVjX. ' (he 
father of the state,' and to be of Chaldee origin. 
It is however probably Egyptian, and Dr. Lee 
is inclined with De Rossi (Etym. Egypt, p. 1) 
to repair to the Coptic, in which Aberek or Abrek 
means ' bow the head.' It is right to add, that 
Qrigen, a native of Egypt, and Jerome, both of 
whom knew the Semitic languages, concur in the 




opinion that Abrech means ' a native Egyptian j 1 
and when we consider how important it was that 
Joseph should cease to be regarded as a foreigner 
£ Abomination], it has in this sense an import- 
ance and significance which no other interpreta- 
tion conveys. It amounts to a proclamation of 
naturalization, which, among such a people as 
the Egyptians, was essential to enable Joseph 
to work out the great plan he had undertaken. 
We believe however that it is not now possible 
to determine the signification of the word with 

ABSALOM (p^plit, father of peace; Sept 
, A/3e<rcra\ct> / u. ; Vulg. Absalmi), the third son of 
David, and his only son by Maachah, daughter of 
Talmai, king of Geshur (2 Sam. iii. 3). He was 
deemed the handsomest man in the kingdom; and 
was particularly noted for the profusion of his 
beautiful hair, which appears to" have been re- 
garded with great admiration ; but of which we 
can know nothing with certainty, except that it 
was very fine and very ample. We are told 
that when its inconvenient weight compelled him 
at times (D'Ov D 1 ^ )*pD does not necessarily 
mean ' every year,' as in the A.V.) to cut it off, 
at was found to weigh ' 200 shekels after the 
king's weight ;' but as this has been interpreted 
as high as 112 ounces (G-eddes) and as low as 7-i 
ounces (A. Clarke), we may be content to under- 
stand that it means a quantity unusually large. 
David's other child by Maachah was a daughter 
named Tamar, who was also very beautiful. She 
became the object of lustful regard to her half- 
brother Amnon, David's eldest son ; and was vio- 
lated by him. In all cases where polygamy is 
allowed, we find that the honour of a sister is in the 
guardianship of her full brother, more even than in 
that of her father, whose interest in her is consi- 
dered less peculiar and intimate. We trace this 
notion even in the time of Jacob (Gen. xxxiv. 6, 
13, 25, sqq.). So in this case the wrong of Tamar 
was taken up by Absalom, who kept her secluded 
in his own house, and said nothing for the present, 
but brooded silently over the wrong he had sus- 
tained and the vengeance which devolved upon 
him. It was not until two years had passed, and 
when this wound seemed to have been healed, that 
Absalom found opportunity for the bloody revenge 
he had meditated. He then held a great sheep- 
shearing feast at Baal-hazor near Ephraim, to 
which he invited all the king's sons ; and, to lull 
suspicion, he also solicited the presence of his fa- 
ther. As he expected, David declined for him- 
self, but allowed Amnon and the other princes to 
attend. They feasted together ; and, when they 
were warm with wine, Amnon was set upon and 
slain by the servants of Absalom, according to 
the previous directions of their master. Horror- 
struck at the deed, and not knowing but that 
they were included in the doom, the other princes 
took to their mules and fled to Jerusalem, filling 
the king with grief and horror by the tidings which 
they brought. As for Absalom, he hastened to 
Geshur and remained there three years with his 
father-in-law, king Talmai. 

Now it happened that Absalom, with all his 
faults, was eminently dear to the heart of his father. 
His beauty, his spirit, his royal birth, may be sup- 
posed to have drawn to him those fond paternal 
feelings which he knew not how to appreciate. At 

all events, David mourned every day after the 
banished fratricide, whom a regard for public 
opinion and a just horror of his crime forbade 
him to recall. His secret wishes to have home 
his beloved though guilty son were however dis- 
cerned by Joab, who employed a clever woman of 
Tekoah to lay a supposed case before him for judg- 
ment; and she applied the anticipated decision 
so adroitly to the case of Absalom, that the king 
discovered the object and detected the interposi- 
tion of Joab. Regarding this as in some degree 
expressing the sanction of public opinion, David 
gladly commissioned Joab to ' call home his ba- 
nished.' Absalom returned ; but David, still 
mindful of his duties as a king and father, con- 
trolled the impulse of his feelings, and declined 
to admit him to his presence. After two years, 
however, Absalom, impatient of his disgrace, 
found means to compel the attention of Joab to 
his case ; and through his means a complete re- 
conciliation was effected, and the father once 
more indulged himself with the presence of his 
son (2 Sam. xiii. xiv.). 

The position at this time occupied by Absalom 
was very peculiar, and the view of it enables us 
to discover how far the general Oriental laws of 
primogeniture were affected by the peculiar con- 
ditions of the Hebrew constitution. At the out- 
set he was the third son of David, Amnon and 
Chileab being his elder brothers. But it was pos- 
sible that he might even then, while they lived, 
consider himself entitled to the succession ; and 
Oriental usage would not have discountenanced 
the pretension. He alone was of royal de- 
scent by the side of his mother ; and royal or 
noble descent by the mother is even now (as we 
see by the recent instance of Abbas Meerza in 
Persia) of itself a sufficient ground of preference 
over an elder brother whose maternal descent is 
less distinguished. This circumstance, illus- 
trated by Absalom's subsequent conduct, may 
suggest that he early entertained a design upon 
the succession to the throne, and that the removal 
of Amnon was quite as much an act of policy as 
of revenge. The other elder brother, Chileab, ap- 
pears to have died : and if the claims of Absalom, 
or rather his grounds of pretension, were so im- 
portant while Amnon and Chileab lived, his 
position must have been greatly strengthened when, 
on his return from exile, he found himself the eldest 
surviving son, and, according to the ordinary laws 
of primogeniture, the heir apparent of the crown; 
Such being his position, and his father being old, 
it would seem difficult at the first view to assign 
a motive for the conspiracy against the crown 
and life of his indulgent father, in which we soon 
after find him engaged. It is then to be consi- 
dered that the king had a dispensing power, and 
was at liberty, according to all Oriental usage, 
to pass by the eldest son and to nominate a 
younger to the succession. This could not have 
affected Absalom, as there is every reason to 
think that David, if left to himself, would have 
been glad to have seen the rule of succession take 
its ordinary course in favour of his best loved 
son. But then, again, under the peculiar theo- 
cratical institutions of the Hebrews, the Divine 
king reserved and exercised a power of dispensa- 
tion, over which the human king, or viceroy, had 
no control. The house of David was established 
as a reigning dynasty; and although the law of 


primogeniture was allowed eventually to take in 
general its due course, the Divine king reserved 
the power of appointing any member of that house 
whom he might prefer. That power had been 
exercised in the family of David by the preference 
of Solomon, who was at this time a child, as the 
successor of his father. David had known many 
years before that his dynasty was to be established 
in a son not yet bom (2 Sam. vii. 12); and when 
Solomon was bom, he could not be ignorant, 
even if not specially instructed, that he was the 
destined heir. This fact must have been known 
to many others as the child grew up, and probably 
the mass of the nation was cognizant of it. In 
this we find a clear motive for the rebellion of 
Absalom — to secure the throne which he deemed 
to be his right by the laws of primogeniture, dur- 
ing the lifetime of his father; lest delay, while 
awaiting the natural term of his days, should so 
strengthen the cause of Solomon with his years, 
as to place his succession beyond all contest. 

The fine person of Absalom, his superior birth, 
and his natural claim, pre-disposed the people to 
regard his pretensions with favour : and this pre- 
disposition was strengthened by the measures 
which he took to win their regard. In the first 
place he insinuated that he was the heir apparent, 
by the state and attendance with which he ap- 
peared in public ; while that very state the more 
enhanced the. show of condescending sympathy 
with which he accosted the suitors who repaired 
for justice or favour to the royal audience, in- 
quired into their various cases, and hinted at the 
fine things which might be expected if he were on 
the throne, and had the power of accomplishing 
his own large and generous purposes. By these 
influences 'he stole the hearts of the men of Israel;' 
and when at length, four years after his return 
from Geshur, he repaired to Hebron' and there 
proclaimed himself king, the great body of the 
people declared for him. So strong ran the tide 
of opinion in his favour, that David found it ex- 
pedient to quit Jerusalem and retire to Mahanaim, 
beyond the Jordan. 

When Absalom heard of this, he proceeded to 
Jerusalem and took possession of the throne with- 
out opposition. Among those who had joined 
him was Ahifhophel, who had been David's coun- 
sellor, and whose profound sagacity caused his 
counsels to be regarded like oracles in Israel. 
This defection alarmed David more than any 
other single circumstance in the affair, and he 
persuaded his friend Hushai to go and join Ab- 
salom, in the hope that he might be made instru- 
mental in turning the sagacious counsels of 
Ahifhophel to foolishness. . The first piece of 
advice which Ahithophel gave Absalom was that 
he should publicly take possession of that portion 
of his lather's harem which had been left behind 
in Jerusalem. This was not only a mode by which 
the succession to the throne might be confirmed 
[Abishag : comp. Herodotus, iii. 68], but in the 
present case, as suggested by the wily counsellor, 
this villanous measure would dispose the people 
to throw themselves the more unreservedly into 
his cause, from the assurance that no possibility 
of reconcilement between him and his father re- 
mained. Hushai had not then arrived. Soon after 
he came, when a council of war was held, to con- 
sider the course of operations to be taken against 
David. Ahithophel counselled that the king 



should be pursued that very night, and smitten, 
while he was ' weary and weak handed, and before 
he had time to recover strength.' Hushai, how- 
ever, whose object was to gain time for David, 
speciously urged, from the known valour of the 
king, the possibility and fatal consequences of a 
defeat, and advised that all Israel should be 
assembled against him in such force as it would 
be impossible for him to withstand. Fatally for 
Absalom, the counsel of Hushai was preferred to 
that of Ahithophel ; and time was thus given 
to enable the king, by the help of his influential 
followers, to collect his resources, as well as to 
give the people time to reflect upon the under- 
taking in which so many of them had embarked. 
The king soon raised a large force, which he 
properly organized and separated into three divi- 
sions, commanded severally by Joab, Abishai, 
and Ittai of Gath. The king himself intended 
to take the chief command ; but the people re- 
fused to allow him to risk his valued life, and the 
command then devolved upon Joab. The battle 
took place in the borders of the forest of Ephraim ; 
and the tactics of Joab, in drawing the enemy 
into the wood, and there hemming tliem in, so 
that they were destroyed with ease, eventually, 
under the providence of God, decided the action 
against Absalom. Twenty thousand of his troops 
were slain, and the rest fled to their homes. Ab- 
salom himself fled on a swift mule; but as he 
went, the boughs of a terebinth tree caught the 
long hair in which he gloried, and he was left 
suspended there. The charge which David had 
given to the troops to respect the life of Ab- 
salom prevented any one from slaying him : but 
when Joab heard of it, he hastened to the spot, 
and pierced him through with three darts. His 
body was then taken down and cast into a pit 
there in the forest, and a heap of stones was 
raised upon it. 

David's fondness for Absalom was unextin- 
guished by all that had passed ; and as he sat, 
awaiting tidings of the battle, at die gate of 
Mahanaim, he was probably more anxious to 
learn that Absalom lived, than that the battle 
was gained ; and no sooner did he hear that Ab- 
salom was dead, than he retired to the chamber 
above the gate, to give vent to his paternal 
anguish. The victors, as they returned, slunk 
into the town like criminals, when they heard 
the bitter wailings of the king : — ' O my son 
Absalom ! my son, my son Absalom ! would 
God I had died for thee, O Absalom, my son, 
my son !' The consequences of this weakness — 
not in his feeling, but in the inability to control 
it — might have been most dangerous, had not Joab 
gone up to him, and, after sharply rebuking him 
for thus discouraging those who had risked their 
lives in his cause, induced him to go down and 
cheer the returning warriors by his presence (2 
Sam. xiii.-xix. 8). 

ABSALOM'S TOMB. A remarkable monu- 
ment bearing this name makes a conspicuous figure 
in the Valley of Jehoshaphat, outside Jerusalem; 
and it has been noticed and described by almost 
all travellers. It is close by the lower bridge over 
the Kedron, and is a square isolated block hewn 
out from the rocky ledge so as to lea\ e an area 
or niche around it. The body of this monument 
is about 24 feet square, and is ornamented on 
each side with two columns and two half co- 


lumns of the Ionic order, with pilasters at the 
comers. The architrave exhibits triglyphs and 
Doric ornaments. The elevation is about 18 or 
20 feet to the top of the architrave, and thus far 
it is wholly cut from the rock. But the adjacent 
rock is here not so high as in the adjoining tomb 
of Zecharias (so called), and therefore the upper 
part of the tomb has been carried up with mason- 
work of large stone?. This consists, first, of two 
square layers, of which the upper one is smaller 
than the lower ; and then a small dome or cupola 
runs up into a low spire, which appears to have 
spread out a little at the top, like an opening 
flame. This mason-work is perhaps 20 feet high, 
giving to the whole an elevation of about 40 feet. 
There is a small excavated chamber in the body 
of the tomb, into which a hole had been broken 
through one of the sides several centuries ago. 

The old travellers who refer to this tomb, as 
well as Calmet after them, are satisfied that 
they find the history of it in 2 Sam. xviii. 18, 
which states that Absalom, having no son, built 
a monument to keep his name in remembrance, 
and that this monument was called ' Absalom's 
Hand ' — that is, index, memorial, or monument 
[Hand]. With our later knowledge, a glance at 
this and the other monolithic tomb bearing the 
name of Zecharias, is quite enough to show that 
they had no connection with the times of the per- 
sons whose names have been given to them. ' The 
style of architecture and embellishment,' writes 
Dr. Robinson, ' shows that they are of a later 
period than most of the other countless sepul- 
chres round about the city, which, with few ex- 
ceptions, are destitute of architectural ornament. 
Yet, the foreign ecclesiastics, who crowded to 
Jerusalem in the fourth century, found these 

monuments here ; and of course it became an 
object to refer them to persons mentioned in the 
Scriptures. Yet, from that day to this, tradition 
seems never to have become fully settled as to 
the individuals whose names they should bear. 
The Itin. Hieros. in a.d. 333, speaks of the two 
monolithio monuments as the tombs of Isaiah and 


Hezekiah. Adamnus, about a.d. 697, mentions 
only one of these, and calls it the tomb of Jeho- 

shavjhat The historians of the Crusades 

appear not to have noticed these tombs. The 
first mention of a tomb of Absalom is by Ben- 
jamin of Tudela, who gives to the other the name 
of King Uzziah ; and from that time to the pre- 
sent day the accounts of travellers have been 
varying and inconsistent' (Biblical Researches, 
i. 519, 520). The remarks of professed architects 
on things requiring a real knowledge of the 
Scriptures and of the ancient Hebrews, are gene- 
rally so unsound and trivial that little can be ex- 
pected from them in such matters. Yet with the 
clear information on some points which we now 
possess, it is surprising to hear so learned an 
architect as Professor Cockerell speak of this 
alleged tomb of Absalom as a most precious 
monument of antiquity, and insist on its un- 
doubted identity, and its ' perfect correspondence 
with holy writ' (Athenaeum, Jan. 28, 1843); 
which holy writ says no more than that Absalom 
did erect some monument. 

ABSINTHIUM QAtylvdiov in New Test.,£y 
which also the Sept. renders the Heb. H3J/? ; 
A.V. wormwood). This proverbially bitter plant 
is used in the Hebrew, as in most other languages, 
metaphorically, to denote the moral bitterness of 
distress and ttjouble (Deut. xxix. 17 ; Prov. v 4 ; 
Jer. ix. 14 ; xxiii. 15 ; Lam. lii. 15, 19 ; Amos v. 
7 ; vi. 12). Thence also the name given to the 
fatal star in Rev. viii. 10, 11. Artemisia is the 
botanical name of the genus of plants in which 
the different species of wormwoods are found. The 
plants of this genus are easily recognised by the 
multitude of fine divisions into which the leaves 
are usually separated, and the numerous clusters 
of small, round, drooping, greenish-yellow, or 
brownish flower-heads with which the branches are 
laden. It must be understood that our common 
wormwood (Artemisia absinthivmi) does not ap- 
pear to exist in Palestine, and cannot therefore 
be that specially denoted by the Scriptural term. 
Indeed it is more than probable that the word is 
intended to apply to all the plants of this class 
that grew in Palestine, rather than to any one of 
them in particular. The examples of this genus 
that have been found in that country are : — 1. Ar- 
temisia Judaica, which, if a particular species 
be intended, is probably the Absinthium of Scrip- 
ture. Rauwolff found it about Bethlehem, and 
Shaw in Arabia and the deserts of Numidia plen- 
tifully. This plant is erect and shrubby, with 
stem about eighteen inches high. Its taste is 
very bitter ; and both the leaves and seeds are 
much used in Eastern medicine, and are reputed 
to be tonic, stomachic, and anthelmintic. 2. Arte- 
misia Romana, which was found by Hasselquist 
on Mount Tabor (p. 281). This species is herba- 
ceous, erect, with stem one or two feet high 
(higher when cultivated in gardens), and nearly 
upright branches. The plant has a pleasantly 
aromatic scent ; and the bitterness of its taste is 
so tempered by the aromatic flavour as scarcely to 
be disagreeable. 3. Artemisia abrotammi, found in 
the south of Europe, as well as in Syria and Pales- 
tine, and eastward even to China. This is a 
hoary plant, becoming a shrub in warm countries ; 
and its branches bear loo^e panicles of nodding 
yellow flower-heads. It is bitter and aromatic, 
with a very strong scent. It is not much used in 


medicine ; but the branches are employed in im- 
parting a yellow dye to wool. 



[Artemisia Judaica.] 

ABSTINENCE is a refraining from the use 
of certain articles of food usually eaten ; or 
from all food during a certain time for some 
particular object. It is distinguished from 
Temperance, which is moderation in ordinary 
food ; and from Fasting, which is abstinence 
from a religious motive. The first example of 
abstinence which occurs in Scripture is that 
in which the use of blood is forbidden to Noah 
(Gen. ix. 20) [Beood]. The next is that men- 
tioned in Gen. xxxii. 32 : ' The children of Is- 
rael eat not of the sinew which shrank, which 
is upon the hollow of the thigh, unto this day, be- 
cause he (the angel) touched the hollow of Jacob's 
thigh in the sinew that shrank.' This practice of 
particular and commemorative abstinence is here 
mentioned by anticipation long after the date of 
the fact referred to, as the phrase ' unto this day' in- 
timates. No actual instance of the practice occurs 
in the Scripture itself, but the usage has always 
been kept up ; and to- the present day the Jews 
generally abstain from the whole hind-quarter on 
account of the trouble and expense of extracting 
the particular sinew (Allen's Modern Judaism, 
p. 421). By the law, abstinence from blood was 
confirmed, and the use of the flesh of even lawful 
animals was forbidden, if the manner of their death 
rendered it impossible that they should be, or un- 
certain that they were, duly exsanguinated (Exod. 
xxii. 31 ; Deut. xiv. 21). A broad rule was also 
laid down by the law, defining whole classes of 
animals that might not be eaten (Lev. xi.) 
[Animal ; Food]. Certain parts of lawful ani- 
mals, as being sacred to the altar, were also inter- 
dicted. These were the large lobe of the liver, the 
kidneys and the fat upon them, as well as the tail 
of the 'fat-tailed' sheep (Lev. iii. 9-11). Every- 
thing consecrated to idols was also forbidden 
(Exod. xxxiv. 15). In conformity with these rules 
the Israelites abstained generally from food which 
was more or less in use among other people. In- 
stances of abstinence from allowed food are not 
frequent, except in commemorative or afflictive 
fasts. The forty days' abstinence of Moses, 
Elijah, and Jesus are peculiar cases requiring to 
be separately considered [Fasting]. The priesfs 
were commanded to abstain from wine previous 
to their actual ministrations (Lev. x. 9), and the 
same abstinence was enjoined to the Nazarites 
during the' whole period of their separation (Num. 
vi. 5). A constant abstinence of this kind was, at a 
later period, voluntaril j undertaken by the Rechab- 
ites (Jer. xxxv. 16, 18). Among the early Christian 
converts there were some who deemed themselves 
bound to adhere to the Mosaical limitations regard- 
ing food, and they accordingly abstained from 

flesh sacrificed to idols, as well as from animals 
which the law accounted unclean ; while others 
contemned this as a weakness, and exulted in the 
liberty wherewith Christ had made his followers free. 
This question was repeatedly referred to St. Paul, 
who laid down some admirable rules on the 
subject, the purport of which was, that every one 
was at liberty to act in tin's matter according to 
the dictates of his own conscience ; but that the 
strong-minded had better abstain from the exer- 
cise of the freedom they possessed, whenever it 
might prove an occasion of stumbling to a weak 
brother (Rom. xiv. 1-3 ; 1 Cor. viii.). In another 
place the same apostle reproves certain sectaries 
who should arise, forbidding marriage and en- 
joining abstinence from meats which God had 
created to be received with thanksgiving (1 Tim. 
iv. 3, 4). The council of the apostles at Jeru- 
salem decided that no other abstinence regarding 
food should be imposed upon the converts than 
' from meats offered to idols, from blood, and from 
things strangled ' (Acts xv. 29). 

The Essenes, a sect among the Jews which is 
not mentioned by name in the Scriptures, led a 
more abstinent life than any recorded in the sacred 
books. As there is an account of them elsewhere 
[Essenes], it is only necessary to mention here 
that they refused all pleasant food, eating nothing 
but coarse bread and drinking only water ; and 
that some of them abstained from food altogether 
until after the sun had set (Philo, De Vita Con- 
tet)iplativd, p. 692, 696). 

That abstinence from ordinary food was prac- 
tised by the Jews medicinally is not shown in 
Scripture, but is more than probable, not only as 
a dictate of nature, but as a common practice of 
their Egyptian neighbours, who. we are informed 
by Diodorus (i. 82), ' being persuaded that the ma- 
jority of diseases proceed from indigestion and ex- 
cess of eating, had frequent recourse to abstinence, 
emetics, slight doses of medicine, and other simple 
means of relieving the system, which some per- 
sons were in the habit of repeating every two or 
three days.' 

ABYSS ("Afivcrcros). The Greek word means 
literally ' without bottom,'' but actually deep, pro- 
found. It is used in the Sept. for the Hebrew 
Cliin, which we find applied either to the ocean 
(Gen. i. 2; vii. 11), or to the under world (Ps. 
lxxi. 21 ; cvii. 26). In the New Testament it 
is used as a noun to describe Hades, or the place 
of the dead generally (Rom. x. 7) ; but more 
especially that part of Hades in which the souls 
of the wicked were supposed to be confined (Luke 
viii. 31; Rev. ix. 1, 2, 11; xx. 1, 3; comp. 
2 Pet. ii. 4). In the Revelation the authorized 
version invariably renders it ' bottomless pit, ' 
elsewhere ' deep.' 

Most of these uses of the word are explained by 
reference to some of the cosmological notions 
which the Hebrews entertained in common with 
other Eastern nations. It was believed that the 
abyss, or sea of fathomless waters, encompassed 
the whole earth. The earth floated on the abyss, 
of which it covered only a small part Accord- 
ing to the same -notion, the earth was founded 
upon the waters, or, at least, had its foundations 
in the abyss beneath (Ps. xxiv. 2 ; exxrvi. 6). 
Under these waters, and at, the bottom of the 
abyss, the wicked were represented as groaning, 
and undergoing the punishment of their sins. 




There were confined the Rephairn — those old 
giants who while living caused surrounding na- 
tions to tremble (Pro v. ix. 18 ; xxix. 16). In 
those dark regions the sovereigns of Tyre, Baby- 
lon, and Egypt are described by the prophets as 
undergoing the punishment of their cruelty and 
pride (Jer. xxvi. 14 ; Ezek. xxviii. 10, &c). This 
was ' the deep' into which the evil spirits in Luke, 
viii. 31, besought that they might not be cast, and 
which was evidently dreaded by them [Cosmo- 
gony ; Hades]. 

The notion of such an abyss was by no means 
confined to the East. It was equally entertained 
by the Celtic Druids, who held that Anmcn (the 
deep, the low port), the abyss from which the 
earth arose, was the abode of the evil principle 
(Gwarthawn), and the place of departed spirits, 
comprehending both the Elysium and the Tarta- 
rus of antiquity. With them also wandering spirits 
were called Plant annvm, ' the children of the 
deep' (Davis's Celtic Researches, p. 175 ; Myth. 
and Rites of the B. Druids, p. 49). 

ABYSSINIA. ' There is no part of Africa, 
Egypt being excepted, the history of which is 
connected with so many objects of interest as 
Abyssinia. A region of Alpine mountains, ever 
difficult of access by its nature and peculiar situ- 
ation, concealing in its bosom the long-sought 
sources of the Nile, and the still more mysterious 
origin of its singular people, Abj f ssinia has alone 
preserved, in the heart of Africa, its peculiar lite- 
rature and its ancient Christian church. "What 
is still more remarkable, it has preserved existing 
remains of a previously existing and wide-spread 
Judaism, and with a language approaching more 
than any living tongue to the Hebrew, a state of 
manners, and a peculiar character of its people, 
which represent in these latter days the habits 
and customs of the ancient Israelites in the times 
of Gideon and of Joshua. So striking is the re- 



semblance between the modem Abyssinians and 
the Hebrews of old, that we can hardly look upon 
them but as branches of one nation ; and if we 
had not convincing evidence to the contrary, and 
knew not for certain that the Abrabamidee ori- 
ginated in Chaldea, and to the northward and 
eastward of Palestine, we might frame a very 

probable hypothesis, which should bring them 
down as a band of wandering shepherds from the 
mountains of Habesh (Abyssinia), and identify 
them with the pastor kings, who, according to 
Manetho, multiplied their bands of the Pharaohs, 
and being, after some centuries, expelled thence 
by the will of the gods, sought refuge in Judea, 
and built the walls of Jerusalem. Such an hy- 
pothesis would explain the existence of an almost 
Israelitish people, and the preservation of a lan- 
guage so nearly approaching to the Hebrew, in 
intertropical Africa. It is certainly untrue, and 
we find no other easy explanation of the fact3 
which the history of Abyssinia j>resents, and 
particularly the. early extension of the Jewish 
religion and customs through that country ' 
Prichard's Physical History of Man, pp. 279, 

The above paragraph will suggest the grounds 
which appear to entitle Abyssinia to a place 
in a Biblical Cyclopaedia. But as the country 
has no physical connection with Palestine — which 
is, geographically, our central object — a parti- 
cular description of it is not necessary, and it 
will suffice to notice the points of inquiry sug- 
gested by the quotation. A brief outline is all 
that seems requisite. 

' Abyssinia ' is an European improvement 
upon the native name of ' Habesh.' That this 
country lies to the south of Nubia, which sepa- 
rates it from Egypt, and to the east of the Gulf 
of Bab-el-Mandah and the southern part of the 
Arabian sea, will sufficiently indicate its position. 
Abyssinia is a high country, which has been 
compared by Humboldt to the lofty Plain of 
Quito. By one of those beautiful synthetical 
operations of which his writings offer so many 
examples, the greatest living geographer, Carl 
Ritter of Berlin, has established, from the writings 
of various travellers, that the high country of 
Habesh consists of three terraces, or distinct 
table-lands, rising one above another, and of 
which the several grades of ascent offer themselves 
in succession to the traveller as he advances from 
the shores of the Red Sea (Erdkunde, th. i. 
s. 168). The first of these levels is the plain of 
Baharnegash: the second* level is the plain and 
kingdom of Tigre, which formerly contained the 
kingdom of Axum: the third level is High 
Abyssinia, or the kingdom of Ambara. This 
name of Amhara is now given to the whole king- 
dom, of which Gondar is the capital, and where 
the Amharic language is spoken, eastward of the 
Takazze. Amhara Proper is, however, a moun- 
tainous province to the south-east, in the centre 
of which was Tegulat, the ancient capital of 
the empire, and at one period the centre of the 
civilization of Abyssinia. This province is now 
in the possession of the Gallas, a barbarous people 
who have overcome all the southern parts of 
Habesh. The present kingdom of Amhara is the 
heart of Abyssinia, and the abode of the emperor, 
or Negush. It contains the upper course of the 
Nile, the valley of Dembea, and the lake Tzana, 
near which is the royal city of Gondar, and like- 
wise the high region of Gojam, which Bruce 
states to be at least two miles above the level of 
the sea. 

Abyssinia is inhabited by several distinct races, 
who are commonly included under the name of 
Habesh or Abyssins. They are clearly distin- 


guished from each other by their languages, but 
have more or less resemblance in manners and 
physical character. These races are — 1. The Ti- 
grani, or Abyssins of the kingdom of Tigre, which 
nearly coincides in extent with the old kingdom 
of Axum. They speak a language called by 
Tellez and Ludolph lingua Tigrania. It is a 
corruption or modern dialect of the Gheez or 
old Ethiopic, which wa3 the ancient vernacular 
tongue of the province ; but is now a dead 
language consecrated to literature and religious 
uses [Ethiopic Language], and the modem 
language of Tigre has been for more than five 
centuries merely an oral dialect. 2. The Amharas, 
who have been for ages the dominant people in 
Abyssinia ; the genuine Amhara being consi- 
dered as a higher and nobler caste, as the military 
and royal tribe. Their language — the Amharic — 
now extends over all the eastern parts of Abys- 
sinia, including various provinces, some of which 
appear at one time to have had vernacular lan- 
guages of their own. 3. The Agows, which name 
is bome by two tribes, who speak different lan- 
guages and inhabit different parts of Abyssinia. 
These are the Agows of Damot, one of the most 
extensive of the southern provinces, where they 
are settled about the sources and on the banks of 
the Nile; and the Agows of Lasta, who, ac- 
cording to Bruce, are Troglodytes, living in 
caverns and paying the same adoration to the 
river Takazze which those of Damot pay to 
the Nile. These last are called by Salt the 
Agows of Takazze ; and although they scarcely 
differ from the other Abyssinians in physical cha- 
racter, their language shows them to be a distinct 
race from the Persian as well as from the Am- 
hara. 4. The Falasha, a people whose present con- 
dition suggests many curious inquiries, and the 
investigation of whose history may hereafter 
throw light upon that of the Abyssins, and of their 
literature and ecclesiastical antiquities. They 
all profess the Jewish religion, and probably 
did so before the era of the conversion of the 
Abyssins to Christianity. They themselves pro- 
fess to derive their origin from Palestine ; but their 
language, which is said to have no affinity with 
the Hebrew, seems sufficiently to refute this pre- 
tension (Vater, Mithridates, t. iii.) According to 
Bruce, the Falasha were very powerful at the 
time of the conversion of the Abyssins to 
Christianity. They were formerly a caste of 
potters and tile-makers in the low country of 
Dembea, but, owing to religious animosities, and 
being weakened by long wars, they were driven 
out thence, and took refuge among rugged and 
almost inaccessible rocks, in the high ridge called 
the mountains of Samen, where they live under 
princes of their own, bearing Hebrew names, and 
paying tribute to the Negush. It is conjectured 
that the Falasha and the Agows were at one time 
the principal inhabitants of the south-eastern parts 
of Abyssinia. 5. The Gafats, a pagan tribe, 
with a distinct language, living on the southern 
banks of the Nile, near Damot. 6. The Gongas 
and Enareans. The former inhabit the province 
of Gonga, and have a language distinct from all 
the preceding, but the same which is spoken by 
the people of Narea, or Enarea, to the southward 
of Habesh. 7. To these we should perhaps now 
add the Gallas, a race of wandering herdsmen, 
extensively spread in eastern intertropical Africa, 



who have become, during the last century, very 
formidable by their numbers, and threaten to over- 
whelm the Abyssinian empire. 

The Abyssinians are to be regarded as belong- 
ing to the black races of men, but this is to be 
received with some explanation. Without entering 
into particulars,, it may be observed, after Riippell 
(Reise in Ahyssinien), that there are two physical 
types prevalent among the Abyssinians. The 
greater number are a finely-formed people of the 
European type, having a countenance and fea- 
tures precisely resembling those of the Bedouins 
of Arabia. To this class belong most of the inha- 
bitants of the high mountains of Samen, and of 
the plains around Lake Tzana, as well as the Fa- 
lasha, or Jews, the heathen Gafats, and the Agows, 
notwithstanding the variety of their dialects. The 
other and very large division of the Abyssinian 
people is identified, as far as physical traits are 
concerned, with the race which has been distin- 
guished by the name of Ethiopian. This race is 
indicated by a somewhat flattened nose, thick 
lips, long and rather dull eyes, and by very 
strongly crisped and almost woolly hair, which 
stands very thickly upon the head. They are 
therefore one of the connecting links between .the 
Arabian and the Negro races, being separated 
from the former by a somewhat broader line than 
from the latter. In their essential characteristics 
they agree with the Nubians, Berberines, and 
native Egyptians (Prichard's Nat. Hist, of Man, 
p. 285). 

Abyssinia has for ages been united under one 
governor, who during the earliest jjeriods resided at 
Axum, the ancient capital of Tigre ; but who for 
some centuries past lias resided at Gondar, a 
more central part of the kingdom. For ages also 
the Abyssins have been Christians, but with a 
strange mixture of the Judaism which appears to 
have been previously professed, and with the ex- 
ceptions which have been already indicated. 
Tigre, in which was the ancient capital of the 
empire, was the country in which Judaism ap- 
pears to have been in former times the most pre- 
valent. It was also the country which possessed, 
in the Gheez or ancient Ethiopic, a Semitic lan- 
guage. It was, moreover, the seat of civilization, 
which, it is important to observe, appears to have 
been derived from the opposite coast of Arabia, 
and to have had nothing Egyptian or Nubian 
in its character. 

These observations have brought us back again 
to the difficulty stated at the commencement of 
this article, in the words of Dr. Prichard, which 
has hitherto been considered insuperable. There 
is no doubt, however, that (his difficulty has chiefly 
arisen from attempting to explain all the phe- 
nomena on a single principle; whereas two causes 
at least contributed to produce them, as the fol- 
lowing remarks will clearly show : — 

The former profession of Judaism in the coun- 
try is sufficient to account for the class cf ob- 
servances and notions derivable from the Jewish 
ritual, which are very numerous, and appear 
singular, mixed up as they are with a professedly 
Christian faith. This, however, does not account 
for Jewish manners and customs, or for tlie ex- 
istence of a language so much resembling the 
Hebrew, and so truly a Semitic dialect as the 
Gheez, or old Ethiopian. For nations may adopt 
a foreign religion, and maintain the usages 



arising from it, without any marked change of 
their customs or language. But all which this 
leaves unsolved may, to our apprehension, be very 
satisfactorily accounted for by the now gene- 
rally admitted fact, that at least the people of 
Tigre, who possessed a Semitic language so 
nearly resembling the Hebrew, arc a Semitic co- 
lony, who imported into Abyssinia not only a 
Semitic language, but Semitic manners, usages, 
and modes of thought. Whether this may or 
may not be true of the Amhara also, depends in 
a great degree upon the conclusion that may be 
reached respecting the Amharic language, which, 
through the large admixture of Ethiopic and 
Arabic words, has a Semitic appearance, but 
may, notwithstanding, prove to be fundamentally 
African. At all events, the extent to which 
the Gheez language has operated upon it would 
afford a proof of the influence of the Semitic 
colony upon the native population : which is all 
that can reasonably be desired to account for the 
jshenomena which have excited so much inquiry 
and attention. 

If it should be objected that it is not sufficient 
to identify as Semitic the manners and usages 
which have been described as Hebrew, we would 
beg to call attention to that passage, in the com- 
mencing extract, which, with an unintended 
significance, intimates that these customs are 
those of the early times of Gideon and Joshua, 
when the Hebrews had not been long subject to the 
peculiar modifying influences of the Mosaical in- 
stitutions. This is very much the same as to say 
that the customs and usages in view are in ac- 
cordance with the general type of Semitic man- 
ners, rather than with the particular type which 
the Mosaical institutions produced ; or, in other 
words, that they resemble the manners of the He- 
brews most when those manners had least departed 
from the general standard of usages which pre- 
vailed among the Semitic family of nations. 
They are, therefore, less Hebrew manners than 
Semitic manners, and, as such, are accounted 
for by the presence of Semitic races in the coun- 
try. In point of fact, travellers who derive their 
first notions of the East from the Bible, when they 
come among a strange people, are too ready to 
set down as specifically Hebrew some of the 
more striking usages which attract their notice ; 
whereas, in fact, they are generically Oriental, 
or at least Semitic, and are Hebrew also 
merely because the Hebrews were an Oriental 
people, and had Oriental features, habits, and 
usages. Our conclusion, then, is, that the former 
prevalence of the Jewish religion in Abyssinia 
accounts for the existence of the Jewish ritual 
usages ; and that the presence of one (perhaps 
more than one) paramount Semitic colony ac- 
counts for the existence, in this quarter, of a 
Semitic language, and Semitic (and therefore 
Hebrew) manners and usages. We entertain a 
very strong conviction that this conclusion will 
be corroborated by all the research into Abyssi- 
nian history and antiquities which may here- 
after be made. 

Having thus considered the question which 
alone authorized the introduction of this article, we 
reserve for other articles [Candace ; Ethiopia ; 
Sheba, Queen of] some questions connected with 
other points in the history of Abyssinia, espe- 
cially the introduction of Judaism into that 


country. Of the numerous books which have 
been written respecting Abyssinia, the Histories 
of Tellez and Ludolph, and the Travels of 
Kramp, Bruce, Salt, and Riippell, are the most 
important : and an admirable digest of existing 
information may be found in Bitter's Erdkunde, 
th. i., and (as far as regards ethnography and 
languages) in Pri chard's Researches, vol. ii. 
ch. vi., and his Natural History of Man, sect. 26. 

ACCAD 03N ; Sept. 'Apx«5), one of the five 
cities in ' the land of Shinar,' or Babylonia, 
which are said to have been built by Nimrod, 
or rather to have been ' the beginning of his 
kingdom' (Gen. x. 10). Their situation has been 
much disputed. jElian (De Animal, xvi. 42) men- 
tions that in the district of Sittacene was a river 
called 'ApydBiqs, which is so near the name 'Ap^aS 
which the LXX. give to this city, that Bochart 
was induced to fix Accad upon that river (Pha- 
■leg. iv. 17). It seems that several of the ancient 
translators found in their Hebrew MSS. Achar 
03K) instead of Accad O^K) (Ephrem Syrus, 
Pseudo-Jonathan, Targum Hieros., Jerome, Abul- 
faragi, &c.) ; and the ease with which the similar 
letters T and "I might be interchanged in copying, 
leaves it doubtful which was the real name. Achar 
was the ancient name of Nisibis ; and hence the 
Targumists give Nisibis or Nisibin (pi^j) 
for Accad, and they continued to be identified 
by the Jewish literati in the times of Jerome. But 
the Jewish literati have always been deplorable 
geographers, and their unsupported conclusions are 
worth very little. Nisibis is unquestionably too 
remote northward to be associated with Babel, 
Erech, and Calneh, ' in the land of Shinar.' 1 These 
towns could not have been very distant from each 
other ; and when to the analogy of names we can 
add that of situation and of tradition, a strong 
claim to identity is established. These circum- 
stances unite at a place in the ancient Sittacene, 
to which Bochart had been led by other analogies. 
The probability that the original name was Achar 
having been established, the attention is naturally 
drawn to the remarkable pile of ancient buildings 
called Akker-koof, in Sittacene, and which the 
Turks know as Akker-i-Nimrood and Akker-i- 
Babil. Col. Taylor, the British resident at Bagh- 
dad, who has given much attention to the subject, 
was the first to make out this identification, and 
to collect evidence in support of it ; and to his 
unpublished communications the writer and other 
recent travellers are indebted for their statements 
on the subject. The Babylonian Talmud might 
be expected to mention the site ; and it occurs 
accordingly under the name of Aggada. It occurs 
also in Maimonides (Jud. Chaz. Tract. Madee, 
fol. 25, as quoted by Hyde), who says, ' Abraham 
xl. annos natus cognovit creatorem suum' ; and im- 
mediately adds, 'Extat Aggada tres annos natus.' 
Akker-koof is about nine miles west of the Ti- 
gris, at the spot where that river makes its nearest 
approach to the Euphrates. The heap of ruins 
to which the name of Nimrod's Hill — Tel-i-Nim- 
rood, is more especially appropriated, consists of 
a mound surmounted by a mass of brick-work, 
which looks like either a tower or an irregular 
pyramid, according to the point from which it is 
viewed. It is about 400 feet in circumference 
at the bottom, and rises to the height of 125 feet 
above the sloping elevation on which it stands. 


The mound, which seems to form the founda- 
tion of the pile, is a mass of rubbish accu- 
mulated by the decay of the superstructure. In 
the ruin itself, the layers of sun-dried bricks, of 
which it is composed, can be traced very dis- 
tinctly. They are cemented together by lime or 
bitumen, and are divided into courses varying 
from 12 to 20 feet in height, and are separated 
by layers of reeds, as is usual in the more an- 
cient remains of this primitive region. Travellers 



have been perplexed to make out the use of this 
remarkable monument, and various . strange con- 
jectures have been hazarded. The embankments 
of canals and reservoirs, and the remnants of 
brick-work and pottery occupying the place all 
around, evince that the Tel stood in an important 
city ; and, as its construction announces it to be 
a p Babylonian relic, the-greater probability is that 
it was one of those pyramidal.structures erected 
upon high places, which were consecrated to -the 
heavenly bodies, and served at once as the temples 
and the observatories of those remote times. Such 
buildings were common to all Babylonian towns; 
and those which remain appear to have been con- 
structed more or less on the model of that in the 
metropolitan city of Babylon. 

ACCARON. [EkronJ. 

ACCENT. Tiiis term is often used with a 
very wide meaning : as when we say that a per- 
son has ' a Scotch accent,* in which case it de- 
notes all that distinguishes the Scotch from the 
English pronunciation. We here confine the 
word, in the first jilace, to mean those peculia- 
rities of sound for which grammarians have in- 
vented the marks called accents ; and we natu- 
rally must have a principal reference to the 
Hebrew and the Greek languages. Secondly, 
we exclude the consideration of such a use of 
accentual marks (so called) as prevails in the 
French language; in which they merely denote 
a certain change in the quality of a sound 
attributed to a vowel or diphthong. It is evident 
that, had a sufficient, number of alphabetical 
vowels been invented, the accents (in such a 
sense) would have been superseded. While the 
Hebrew and Greek languages are here our chief 
end, yet, in' order to pass from the known to the 
unknown, we shall throughout refer to our awn 
tongue as the best source of illustration. In this 
. respect, we undoubtedly overstep the proper limits 
of a Biblical Cyclopaedia ; but we are in a 
manner constrained so to do, since the whole sub- 
ject is misrepresented or very defectively ex- 

plained in most English grammars : and if we 
abstained from this full exposition, many readers 
would most probably, after all, misunderstand 
our meaning. 

Even after the word accent has been thus 
limited, there is an ambiguity in the term ; it has 
still a double sense, according to which we name 
it either oratorical or vocabular. By the latter, 
we mean the accent which a word in isolation 
receives ; for instance, if we read in a vocabulary : 
while by oratorical accent we understand that 
which words actually have when read aloud or 
spoken as parts of a sentence. 

The Greek men of letters, who, after the Ma- 
cedonian kingdoms had taken their final form, 
invented accentual marks to assist foreigners 
in learning their language, have (with a single 
uniform exception) been satisfied to indicate 
the vocabular accent : but the Hebrew gram- 
marians aimed, when the pronunciation of the 
old tongue was in danger of being forgotten, at 
indicating by marks the traditional inflections of 
the voice with which the Scriptures were to be 
read aloud in the synagogues. In consequence, 
they have introduced a very complicated system 
of accentuation to direct the reader. Some of 
their accents (so called) are, in fact, stops, others 
syntactical notes, which served also as guides to 
the voice in chanting. 

In intelligent reading or speaking, the vocal 
organs execute numerous intonations which we 
have no method of representing on paper ; espe- 
cially such as are called inflections or slides by 
teachers of elocution : but on these a book might 
be written ; and we can here only say, that the 
Masoretic accentuation of the Hebrew appears to 
have straggled to depict the rhythm of sen- 
tences ; and the more progress has been made 
towards a living perception of the language, the 
higher is the testimony borne by the learned to 
the success which this rather cumbrous system 
has attained. The rhythm, indeed, was pro- 
bably a sort of chant ; since to this day the 
Scriptures are so recited by the Jews, as also the 
Koran by the Arabs or Turks : nay, in Turkish, 
the same verb (oqumaq) signifies to sing and to 
read. But this chant by no means i attains the 
shaip discontinuity of European singing : on the 
contrary, the voice slides from note to note. Mo- 
notonous as the whole sounds, a deeper study of 
the expression intended might probably lead to a 
fuller understanding of the Masoretic accents. 

Wherein the Accent consists. — In ordinary 
European words, one syllable is pronounced with 
a peculiar stress of the voice ; and is then said to 
be accented. In our own language, the most 
obvious accompaniment of this stress on the 
syllable is a greater clearness of sound in the 
vowel ; insomuch that a very short vowel cannot 
take the primary accent in English. Neverthe- 
less, it is very far from the truth, that accented 
vowels and syllables are necessarily long, or 
longer than the unaccented in the same wind ; 
of which we shall speak afterwards. In illustra- 
tion, however, of the loss of clearness in a vowel, 
occasioned by a loss of accent, we may compare 
a contest with to contest ; equal with equality; in 
which the syllables con. qi/al, are sounded with a 
very obscure vowel when unaccented. 

Let us observe, in passing, that, when a vowel 
sound changes through transposition of the ac- 





cent, the Hebrew grammarians — instead of trust- 
ing that the voice will of itself modify the vowel 
when the accent is shifted — generally think it 
necessary to depict the vowel differently : which 
is one principal cause of the complicated changes 
of the vowel points. 

A second concomitant of the accent is less 
marked in English than in Italian or Greek; 
namely — a musical elevation of the voice. On 
a piano or violin we of course separate en- 
tirely the stress given to a note (which is called 
forte and staccato) from its elevation (which may 
be a, or c, or f) ; yet in speech it is natural to 
execute in a higher tone, or, as we improperly 
term it, in a higher key, a syllable on which we 
desire to lay stress : possibly because sharp sounds 
are more distinctly heard than fiat ones. Practi- 
cally, therefore, accent embraces a slide of the 
voice into a higher note, as well as an emphasis 
on the vowel ; and in Greek and Latin it would 
appear that this slide upwards was the most 
marked peculiarity of accent, and was that which 
gained it the names wpocroiSia, accentus. Even 
at the present day, if we listen to the speech of a 
Greek or Italian, we shall observe a marked ele- 
vation in the slides of the voice, giving the ap- 
Iiearance of great vivacity, even where no pecu- 
iar sentiment is intended. Thus, if a Greek be 
requested to pronounce the words crotpia (wisdom), 
rrapaPoXri (parable), his voice will rise on the 
i and ijin a manner never heard from an Eng- 
lishman. In ancient Greek, however, yet greater 
nicety existed ; for the voice had three kinds of 
accent, or slides, which the grammarians called 
flat, sharp, and circumflex ; as in ris, ris ; ttov. 
It is at the same time to be remarked, that this 
flat accent was solely oratorical ; for when a 
word was read in a vocabulary, or named in 
isolation, or indeed at the end of a sentence, it 
never took the fiat accent, even on the last syl- 
lable ; except, it would seem, the word r\s, a 
certain one. In the middle of a sentence, however, 
the simple accent (for we are not speaking of the 
circumflex) on a penultima or antepenultima was 
always sharp, and on a last syllable was flat. Pos- 
sibly a stricter attention to the speech of the best 
educated modem Greeks, or, on the contrary, to 
that of their peasants in isolated districts, might 
detect a similar peculiarity : but it is generally 
believed that it has been lost, and some uncer- 
tainty therefore naturally rests on the true pro- 
nunciation. On the whole, it is most probable 
that the fiat accent was a stress of the voice ut- 
tered in a lower note, much as the second accent 
in grandfather ; that the sharp accent was that 
which prevails in modern Greek, and has been 
above described ; and that the circumflex com- 
bined an upward and a downward slide on the 
same vowel. The last was naturally incapable 
of being executed, unless the vowel was long; 
but the other two accents could exist equally 
well on a short vowel. 

In English elocution various slides are to be 
heard, more complicated than the Greek cir- 
cumflex ; but with us they are wholly oratorical, 
never vocabular. Moreover, they are peculiar to 
vehement or vivacious oratory ; being abundant 
in familiar or comic speech, and admissible 
also in high pathetic or indignant declamation : 
but they are almost entirely excluded from tran- 
quil and serious utterance. 

Secondary Accent. — On the same word, when 
it consists of many syllables, a double accent is 
frequently heard, certainly in English, and pro- 
bably in most languages ; but in our own tongue 
one of the two is generally feebler than the other, 
and may be called secondary. If we agree to 
denote this by the flat accent (\) of the Greeks, 
we may indicate as follows our double accent : 

consideration, disobedience, unpretending ; 

secondary, accessory, peremptorily. 
We have purposely selected as the three last ex- 
amples cases in which the secondary accent falls 
on a very short or obscure vowel, such as can 
never sustain the primary accent. 

In some casesj tivo syllables intervene between 
the accents, and it may then be difficult to say 
which accent is the principal. In aristocrat, 
equalize, antidote, the first syllable has a stronger 
accent than the last ; but in aristocratic, equali- 
zation, antediluvian, they seem to be as equal as 
possible, though the latter catches the ear more. 
In aristocracy, the former is beyond a doubt 
secondary ; but here the. two are separated by 
only one syllable. Predetermination has three 
accents, of which the middlemost is secondary. 

In the Greek language a double accent is some- 
times found on one word; but only when the. 
latter is superinduced by some short and subor- 
dinate word which hangs upon the other. Such 
short words are called enclitics, and form a class 
by themselves in the language, as they cannot be 
known by their meaning or form. By way of 
example we may give, Tvpavvos ris (a certain 
usurper), olSd ae (I know thee). In these cases, 
we observe that the two accents, if both are sharp, 
are found on alternate syllables, as in English ; 
but whether one of them was secondary we do 
not ' know. If the former is a circumflex, the 
latter is on the following syllable. Occasionally, 
two or more enclitics follow each other in suc- 
cession, and produce a curious combination ; as, 
elirds trov ri /not. These accents, however, are 
not vocabular, but oratorical. 

The Hebrews have, in many cases, secondary- 
accents, called a foretone, because with them it 
always precedes the principal accent (or ' tone *), 
as, 3rD, hdtebu ; the intermediate and un- 
accented vowel being in such cases exceedingly 
short and obscure, so that some grammarians 
refuse to count it at all. This foretone is de- 
scribed as a stress of the voice uttered in a lower 
note, and therefore may seem identical in sound 
with the flat accent of the Greeks. It differs, 
however, in being always accompanied with the 
sharp accent on the same word, and in being 
vocabular, not merely oratorical. 

On the Place of the Accent. — A great difference 
exists between different languages as to the place 
of the accent. In Hebrew it is found solely on 
the last syllable and last but one, and is assumed 
systematically by many grammatical terminations, 
as in Mklek (for Mdlk), a king, pi. MePn/d'm. 
This is so entirely opposed to the analogies of 
English, that it has been alleged (Latham On the 
English Language) that Princess is the only 
word in which our accent falls on a final inflec- 
tion. The radical contrast of all this to our 
own idiom leads to a perverse pronunciation of 
most Hebrew names : thus we say Isaiah, Ne- 
hemiah, Canaan, I'srael — although with their true 


accent tliey are Isaiah, Nehemyah, Cana-an, 
Isra-el ; to say nothing of other peculiarities of 
the native sound. In Greek, the accent is 
found on any of the three last syllables of a 
word ; the circumflex only on the two last. In 
the Latin language, it is very remarkable that 
(except in the case of monosyllables) the accent 
never fell on the last syllable, but was strictly 
confined to the penultima and antepenultima. 
This peculiarity struck the Greek ear, it is said, 
more than anything else in the sound of Latin, as 
it gave to it a pompous air. It is the more diffi- 
cult to believe that any thoughtful Greek seri- 
ously imputed it to Roman pride, since we are 
told that the yEolic dialect of Greek itself agreed 
in this respect with the Latin (See Foster On 
Accent and Quantity, ch. iv.). The Latin ac- 
centuation is remarkable for having the place of 
the accent dictated solely by euphony, without 
reference to the formation or meaning of the 
word; in which respect the Greek only partly 
agrees with it, chiefly when the accent falls on 
the penultima or antepenultima. The Latin 
accent, however, is guided by the quantity of 
the penultimate syllable ; the Greek accent by 
the quantity of the ultimate voioel. The rules 
are these : — 

1. Greek : ' When the last vowel is long, the 
accent is on the penultima ; when the last vowel 
is short, the accent is on the antepenultima.' 
Oxytons are herein excepted. 2. Latin : ' When 
the penultimate syllable is long, the accent is 
upon it ; when short, the accent is on the ante- 
penultima. Every dissyllable is accented on the 
penultima.' Accordingly, the Greek accent, even 
on the cases of the very same noun, shifted in the 
following curious fashion : N. oLvQpanros, G. av- 
OpdoTrou, D. avdp<oirci), Ac. &vQpuiTov; and in Latin, 
rather diiferently, yet with an equal change, 
N. Sermo, G. Serm6?iis, &c. It is beyond all 
question that the above rule in Greek is genuine 
and correct (though it does not apply to oxytons, 
that is, to words accented on the last syllable, 
and has other exceptions which the Greek gram- 
mars will tell) ; but there is a natural difficulty 
among Englishmen to believe it, since we have 
been taught to pronounce Greek with the accen- 
tuation of Latin ; a curious and hurtful corrup- 
tion, to which the influence of Erasmus is said to 
have principally contributed. It deserves to be 
noted that the modern Greeks, in pronouncing 
their ancient words, retain, with much accuracy 
on the whole, the ancient rules of accent ; but in 
words of recent invention or introduction they 
follow the rule, which seems natural to an English- 
man, of keeping the accent on the same syllable 
through all cases of a noun. Thus, although they 
sound as of old, N. 'avdponros, G. avQpdmov, yet 
in the word KOKwvri,a lady, which is quite recent, 
we find (plural*), N. at Koicc&ves, G. rcou kokcovcov, 
&c. Similarly, 6 Kairiravos, the captain, G. tov 
Kcmnavov, &c. This is only one out of many 
marks that the modern Greek has lost the nice 
appreciation of the quantity or time of vowel 
sounds, which characterized the ancient. 

In all Latin or Greek words which we import 
into English, so long as we feel them to be fo- 
reign, we adhere to the Latin rules of accentua- 
tion as well as we know how : thus, in democrat, 
democracy, d&nocrdtibal ; philosophy, philoso- 
phical ; astronomy, astronomical ; domestic, do- 



mesticity, domestication ; possible, possibility ; 
barbarous, barbarity. But the moment we treat 
any of these words as natives, we follow our own 
rule of keeping the accent on tlie radical syl- 
lable ; as in ba'rbarousness, where the Saxon 
ending, ness, is attached to the foreign word. 
With the growth of the language, we become 
more and more accustomed to hear a long train 
of syllables following the accent. Thus, we 
have comfort, comfortable, comfortableness ; par- 
liament, parliamentary, which used to be parlia- 

In many provinces of England, and in par- 
ticular families, the older and better pronun- 
ciations, contrary, industry, keep their place, in- 
stead of the modem contrary, industry. The 
new tendency has innovated in Latin words so 
far, that many persons say inimical, contemplate, 
inculcate, decorous, sonorous, and even concord- 
ance, for inimical, contemplate, &c. 'Alexander 
has supplanted ^Alexander. In the cases of con- 
cordance, clamorous, and various others, it is 
probable that the words have been made to follow 
the pronunciation of concord, clamor, as in native 
English derivatives. The principle of change, to 
which we have been pointing, is probably deep- 
seated in human speech ; for the later Attics are 
stated to have made a similar innovation in va- 
rious words ; for example, ^Esehylus and Thucy- 
dides said bp.ol.os, rpo-ndiov, but Plato and Aris- 
totle, op.oios, rpiircuov. 

If the principal accent is very distant from one 
end of a long word, a great obscurity in the dis- 
tant vowel-sounds results, which renders a word 
highly unmusical, and quite unmanageable to 
poetry. This will be seen in such pronunciations 
as parliamentary, peremptorily. • 

In Hebrew the same phenomenon is exhibited 
in a contrary way, the early vowels of a word 
being apt to become extremely short, in conse- 
quence of the accent being delayed to the end. 

Thus, 7HN, ohe'l, a tent, pi. DvPIK, ohcdi'm; 

•■ptpp., qatelit, they killed ; ■lfl-pbj?, qdtaluhu, 

they killed him. Oratorical reasons occasionally 
induce a sacrifice of the legitimate vocabular 
accent. In English this happens chiefly in case3 
of antithesis ; as when the verbs, which would 
ordinarily be sounded increase and decrease, re- 
verse their accent in order to bring out more 
clearly the contrasted syllables : ' He must in- 
crease, but I must ^crease. ' 

This change is intended, not for mere euphony, 
but to assist the meaning. Variety and energy 
seem to be aimed at. in the following Hebrew 
example, which Ewald has noticed, and which 
seems to indicate that more of the same sort must 
remain to be discovered: Judyes v. 1:2. '£>/, 
'uri, Debord : 'iiri,'/'iri, dabbiri shir ; which, after 
Ewald, we may imitate by translating thus, ' Up 
then, up then, Deborah : dp then, up then, utter a 
song.' The Greek and Hebrew languages, more- 
ever, in the pause of a sentence, modified the 
accent without reference to the meaning of the 

words. Thus the verb ordinarily sounded •1?"7j3» 
gade'lii, with a very short penultimate vowel, be- 
comes at the end of the sentence •1? l '13, gadelu, 
with a long and accented penultima (See Ewald's 
Hebrew Gram. § 131, 133). The Greek lan- 





guage also at the end of a sentence changes a 
fiat accent into a sharp one; for instance, the 
word ri/jiT] (honor) before a pause becomes ti/xt] ; 
but no elongation of vowels ever accompanies this 

Accent in Compound Words. — It is principally 
by the accent that the syllables of a word are 
joined into a single whole ; and on this account 
a language with well-defined accentuation is 
(cseteris paribus) so much the easier to be under- 
stood when heard, as well as so much the more 
musical. This function of the accent is dis- 
tinctly perceived by us in such words of our lan- 
guage as have no other organized union of their 
parts. To the eye of a foreigner reading an 
English book, steam-boat appears like two words ; 
especially as our printers have an extreme dislike 
of hyphens, and omit them whenever the cor- 
rector of the press will allow it. In Greek or 
Persian two such words would be united into one 
by a vowel of union, which is certainly highly 
conducive to euphony, and the compound would 
appear in the form steamiboat or steamobotos. 
As we are quite destitute of such apparatus (in 
spite of a few such exceptions as handicraft, 
mountebank"), the accent is eminently important ; 
by which it is heard at once that steamboat is 
a single word. In fact, we thus distinguish be- 
tween a stonebox and a stone box; the former 
meaning a box for holding stones, the latter a box 
made of stone. Mr. Latham (Engl. Language, 
§ 234) has ingeniously remarked that we may 
read the following lines from Ben Jonson in two 
ways : 

' An'd thy silvershming quiver ' — 
or, ' An'd thy silver shining quiver ' — 
with a slight difference of sense. 

The Hebrew language is generally regarded as 
quite destitute of compound words. It possesses, 
nevertheless, something at least closely akin to 
them in (what are called) nouns in regimen. 
Being without a genitive case, or any particle 
devoted to the same purpose as the English pre- 
position of, they make up for this by sounding 
two words as if in combination. The former 
word loses its accent, and thereby often incurs a 
shortening and obscuration of its vowels ; the 
voice hurrying on to the latter. This may be 
illustrated by the English pronunciation of ship 
of war, man of war, man at arms, phrases which, 
by repetition, have in spirit become single words, 
the first accent being lost. Many such exist in 
our language, though unregistered by gram- 
marians — in fact, even in longer phrases the phe- 
nomenon is observable. Thus, Secretary at War, 
Court of Queen's Bench, have very audibly but 
one predominating accent, on the last syllable. 

So, in Hebrew, from jV-TH, xissfTj/o'w, a vision, 
conies >"l?v I^IDi x ez y° n -laild, vision of the 

night (Job xx. 8). That every such case is fairly 
to be regarded as a compound noun was remarked 
by Dr. Campbell of Aberdeen, who urged that 
otherwise, in Isaiah ii. 20, we ought to render the 
words ' the idols of his silver ;' whereas, in fact, 
the exact representation of the Hebrew in Greek 
is not e'fficcAa apyvpov-avrov, but, so to say, 
apyvpeiSooAa avrov. In Greek compounds the 
position of the accent is sometimes a very cri- 
tical matter in distinguishing active and passive 


meanings of epithets. Thus, fx-r}Tp6icTovos meaii3 
mother-slain, or slain by one's mother; while 
/jLTjTpoKTovos is mother-slaying, or slaying one's 
mother. Such distinctions, however, seem to 
have been confined to a very small class of 

Sense of a simple word modified by the Ac- 
cent. — It is familiarly remarked in our English 
grammars, that (in words of Latin origin, gene- 
rally imported from French) we often distinguish 
a verb from a noun by putting the accent on the 
penultimate syllable of the noun and the ulti- 
mate of the verb. Thus, we say, an insult, to 
insult; a contest, to contest ; &c, &c. The dis- 
tinction is so useful, that in doubtful cases it 
appears desirable to abide by the rule, and to 
say (as many persons do say) a perfume, toper- 
fume; details, to detail; the contents of a book, 
to content ; &c. It is certainly curious that the 
very same law of accent pervades the Hebrew 
language, as discriminating the simplest triliteral 

noun and verb. Thus, we have ""]?£?, melek, 
king ; \?0, maldk, he ruled. In the Greek lan- 
guage the number of nouns is very considerable 
in which the throwing of the accent on "the last 
syllable seriously alters the sense ; as, rpoiros, a 
manner ; rporrbs, the leather of an oar :, 
anger or mind ; Qvijlos, garlic : Kpivoiv, judging ; 
Kpivuiv, a lily-bed : £>fj.os, a shoulder ; u/xbs, cruel. 
A very extensive vocabulary of such cases is ap- 
pended to Scapula's Greek Lexicon. 

Relation of Accent to Rhythm and Metre. — 
Every sentence is necessarily both easier to the 
voice and pleasanter to the ear when the whole is 
broken up into symmetrical parts, with conve- 
nient pauses between them. The measure of the 
parts is marked out by the number of principal 
beats of the voice (or oratorical accents) which 
each clause contains ; and when these are so 
regulated as to attain a certain musical uniformity 
without betraying art, the sentence has the pleas- 
ing rhythm of good prose. When art is not 
avowed, and yet is manifest, this is unpleasing, 
as seeming to proceed from affectation and in- 
sincerity. When, however, the art is avowed, we 
call it no longer rhythm, but metre ; and with 
the cultivation of poetry, more and more melody 
has been exacted of versifiers. 

To the English ear, three and four beats of the 
voice give undoubtedly the most convenient length 
of clauses. Hence, in what is called poetical 
prose, it will be found that any particularly me- 
lodious passage, if broken up into lines or verses, 
yields generally either three or four beats in every 
verse. For example : 
' Where is the maid of Ar'van ? 

Gone, as a vision of the night. 

Where shall her lover look for her ? 

The hall, which once she gladdened, is desolate.' 
But no poetical prose, not even translations of 
poetry which aim at a half-metrical air, will be 
found to retain constantly the threefold and four- 
fold accent. To rjroduce abruptness, half lines, 
containing but two accents, are thrown in ; and 
in smoother feeling clauses of five accents, which 
often tend to become the true English blank 
verse. All longer clauses are composite, and can 
be resolved into three and three, four and three, 
four and four, &c. To illustrate this, let us take 

J ! 


a passage of the Old Testament in the common 
English translation. Habakkuk iii. 2 : 
)'h, Lord! 

I have heard thy speech ; and was afraid. 

Revive thy work in the midst of the years ! 

In the midst of the years make known ! 

In wrath remember mercy ! 

God came from Teman, 

And the Holy One from Mount Paran. 

His glory covered the heavens, 

And the earth was full of his praise. 

His brightness was as the light, 

He had horns coming out of his hand, 

And there was the hiding of his power.' &c. &c. 

The accent which we have been here describ- 
ing as the source of rhythm is strictly the ora- 
torical accent. As this falls only on the more 
emphatic words of the sentence, it is decidedly 
strong, and, in comparison with it, all the feebler 
and secondary accents are unheard, or at least 
uncounted. Nor is any care taken that the suc- 
cessive accents should be at equable distances. 
Occasionally they occur on successive syllables ; 
much oftener at the distance of two, three, or four 
syllables. Nevertheless, this poetical rhythm, as 
soon as it becomes avowedly cultivated, is em- 
bryo-metre ; and possibly this is the real state of 
the Hebrew versification. Great pains have been 
taken, from Gomarus in 1630 to Bellermarm and 
Saalscbutz in recent times, to define the laws of 
Hebrew metre. A concise history of these at- 
tempts will be found in the Introduction to De 
Wette's Commentary on the Psalms. But al- 
though the occasional rise of rhyme or assonance 
in Hebrew seems to be more than accidental, the 
failure of so many efforts to detect any real 
metre in the old Hebrew is decisive enough to 
warn future inquirers against losing their labour. 
(See the article Parallelismus in Ersch and 
Gruber's Encyclopedic). The modern Jews, in- 
deed, have borrowed accentual metre from the 
Arabs : but, although there is nothing in the 
genius of the tongue to resist it, perhaps the 
fervid, practical genius of the Hebrew prophets 
rejected any such trammel. Repetition and am- 
plification mark their style as too declamatory to 
be what we call poetry. Nevertheless, in the 
Psalms and lyrical passages, increasing investi- 
gation appears to prove that considerable artifice 
of composition has often been used (See Ewald's 
Poetical Books of the Old Test. vol. i.). 

In our own language, it is obvious to every 
considerate reader of poetry that the metres called 
anapaestic depend far more on the oratorical 
accent than on the vocabular (which is, indeed, 
their essential defect) ; and on this account nu- 
merous accents, which the voice really utters, are 
passed by as counting for nothing in the metre. 
We offer, as a single example, the two following 
lines of Campbell, in which we have denoted by 
the flat accent those syllables the stress upon 
which is subordinate and extra metrum : 

' Say, rush'd the bold eagle exulting] y forth 
From his home, in the dark-rolling clouds of 
the north.' 
Such considerations, drawn entirely out of ora- 
tory, appear to be the only ones on which it is 
any longer useful to pursue an inquiry concern- 
ing Hebrew metres. 



Confusion of Accent with Quantity. — It is a 
striking fact that Foster, the author of a learned 
and rather celebrated book intended to clear up 
this confusion, succeeded in establishing the truth 
concerning Greek and Latin, by help of ancient 
grammarians, but himself fell into the popular 
errors whenever he tried to deal with the English 
language. Not only does he allege that < the 
voice dwells longer' on, the first syllable of ho- 
nestly, character, &c, than on the two last (and 
improperly writes them honestly , character), but 
he makes a general statement that accent and 
quantity, though separated in Greek and Latin, 
are inseparable in English. The truth is so far 
otherwise, that probably in three words out of 
four we separate them. As single instances, con- 
sider the words honestly, character, just adduced. 
The accent is clearly on the first syllable ; but 
that syllable in each is very short. On the other 
hand, the second syllable of both, though un- 
accented, yet by reason of the consonants stl, ct, 
is long, though less so than if its vowel likewise 
had been long. The words are thus, like the 
Greek KvMvdpos, a cy'linder, accented on the 
first syllable, yet as to quantity an amphibrach 
(o — o). Until an Englishman clearly feels 
and knows these facts of his own tongue, he will 
be unable to avoid the most perplexing errors on 
this whole subject. 

Invention of Accents. — We have already said 
that the accentual marks of the Greeks were in- 
vented not long after the Macedonian conquests. ' 
To Aristophanes of Byzantium, master of the 
celebrated Aristarchus, is ascribed the credit of 
fixing both the punctuation and the accentuation 
of Greek. He was bom near the middle of the 
second century BiC. ; and there seems to be no 
doubt that we actually have before our eyes a 
pronunciation which cannot have greatly differed 
from that of Plato. As for the Hebrew accentu- 
ation generally called Masoretic, the learned are 
agreed that it was a system only gradually built 
up by successive additions ; the word Masora 
itself meaning tradition. The work is ascribed 
to the schools of Tiberias and Babylon, which 
arose after the destruction of Jerusalem by the 
Romans ; but it cannot be very accurately stated 
in how many centuries the system of vowel-points 
and accentuation attained the fully-developed 
state in which we have received it. There is, 
however, no question among the ablest scholars 
that these marks represent the utterance of a 
genuine Hebrew period ; the pronunciation, it 
may be said with little exaggeration, of Ezra 
and Nehemiah. — F. W. N. 

ACCHABIS. [Spider.] 

ACCHO (ISy : Sept. "Akx&')> a town ancl 
haven within the nominal territory of the tribe 
of Asher, which however never acquired pos- 
session of it (Judg. i. 31). The Greek and Roman 
writers call ifKicr). Ace (Strab. xvi. S77 ; Diod. 
Sic. xix. 03 ; C. Nep. xiv. 5) ;. but it was even- 
tually better known as Ptoi.emais (PI in. Hist. 
Nat. v. 19), which name it received from the first 
Ptolemy, king of Egypt, by whom it was much 
improved. By this name it is mentioned in the 
Apocrypha (1 Mace. x. 5(3 ;. xi. 22, 21 : xii. -15, 
48; 2" Marc xiii. 14); in the New Testament 
(Acts xxi. 7), and by Josephus (Antiq. xiii. 12. 
2, scq.). It was also called Coloiiia Chmdii 



Ccesaris, in consequence of its receiving the 
privileges of a Roman city from the emperor 
Claudius (Plin. v. 17 ; xxxvi. 65). But the 
names thus imposed or altered by foreigners never 
took with the natives, and the place is still known 

in the country by the name of \£g, Akka. 

It continued to be called Ptolemais by the 
Greeks of the lower empire, as well as by Latin 
authors, while the Orientals adhered to the ori- 
ginal designation. This has occasioned some spe- 
culation. Vitriacus, who was bishop of the place, 
produces the opinion (Hist. Orient, c. 25) that the 
town was founded by twin-brothers, Ptolemseus 
and Aeon. Vinisauf imagines that the old 
town retained the name of Accho, while that of 
Ptolemais was confined to the more modern addi- 
tions northward, towards the hill of Turon (G. 
Vinisauf, i. 2, p. 248), but the truth undoubtedly 
is that the natives never adopted the foreign 
names of this or any other town. The word 
Accho, or Akka, can be traced to no Hebrew or 
Syriac root, and is, Sir W. Drummond alleges 
( Origines,h. v. c. 3), clearly of Arabian origin, and 

derived from (J^^Cc a ^> which signifies sultry. 
The neighbourhood was famous for the sands 
which the Sidonians employed in making glass 
(Plin. Hist. Nat. v. 19 ; Strabo, xvi. 877) ; and 
the Arabians denote a sandy shore heated by the 

sun by the word jfcg, akeh, or j&g, aket, or 

(with the nunnation) aketon. During the Cru- 
sades the place was usually known to Europeans 
by the name of Acon : afterwards, from the occu- 
pation of the Knights of St. John of Jerusalem, 
as St. Jean u'Acre, or simply Acre. 

This famous city and haven is situated in N. 
lat. 32° 55', and E. long. 35° 5', and occupies 
the north-western point of a commodious bay, 
called the Bay of Acre, the opposite or south- 
western point of which is formed by the promon- 
tory of Mount Carmel. The city lies on the plain 
to which it gives its name. Its western side is 
washed by the waves of the Mediterranean, and 
on the south lies the bay, beyond which may be 
seen the town of Caipha, on the site of the ancient 
Calamos, and, rising high above both, the shrubby 
heights of Carmel. The mountains belonging to 
the chain of Anti-Libanus are seen at the dis- 
tance of about four leagues to the north, while 
to the east the view is bounded by the fruitful 
hills of the Lower Galilee. The bay, from the 
town of Acre to the promontory of Mount Carmel, 
is three leagues wide and two in depth. The 
port, on account of its shallowness, can only be 
entered by vessels of small burden ; but there is 
excellent anchorage on the other side of the bay, 
before Caipha, which is, in fact, the roadstead of 
Acre (Turner, ii. Ill ; G. Robinson, i. 198). In the 
time of Strabo Accho was a great city (jlroK^fiais 
icrri fieyaXT] ttoXls %v j Ak7)v wv6/j.a£ov Trporepop, 
xvi. p. S77), and it has continued to be a place of 
importance down to the present time. But after 
the Turks gained possession of it, Acre so rapidly 
declined, that the travellers of the sixteenth 
and seventeenth centuries concur in describing 
it as much fallen from its former glory, of which, 
however, traces still remained. The missionary 
Eugene Roger (La Terre Saincte, 1 645, pp. 44-46), 
remarks that the whole place had such a sacked 


and desolated appearance, that little remained 
worthy of note except the palace of the grand- 
master of the Knights Hospitallers, and the 
church of St. Andrew : all the rest was a sad and 
deplorable ruin, pervaded by a pestiferous air, 
which soon threw strangers into dangerous mala- 
dies. The Emir Fakr-ed-din had, however, lately 
built a commodious khan for the use of the 
merchants : for there was still considerable traffic, 
and vessels were constantly arriving from France, 
Venice, England, and Holland, laden with oil, 
cotton, skins, and other goods. The Emir had 
also built a strong castle, notwithstanding re- 
peated orders from the Porte to desist. Roger 
also fails not to mention the immense stone balls, 
above a hundredweight, which were found in the 
ditches and among the ruins, and which were 
thrown into the. town from machines before the 
use of cannon. This account is confirmed by 
other travellers, who add little or nothing to it 
(Doubdan, Cotovicus, Zuallart, Morison, Nau, 
I) Arvieux, and others). Morison, however, dwells 
more on the ancient remains, which consisted of 
portions of old walls of extraordinary height and 
thickness, and of fragments of buildings, sacred 
and secular, which still afforded manifest tokens 
of the original magnificence of the place. He 
(ii. 8) affirms that the metropolitan church of St. 
Andrew was ecpial to the finest of those he had seen 
in France and Italy, and that the church of St. 
John was of the same perfect beauty, as might 
be seen by the pillars and vaulted roof, half 
of which still remained. An excellent and 
satisfactory account of the place is given by 
Nau (liv. v. ch. 1 9), who takes particular notice 
of the old and strong vaults on which the houses 
are built ; and the present writer, having observed 
the same rjractice in Baghdad, has no doubt 
that Nau is right in the conjecture that they 
were designed to afford cool underground re- 
treats to the inhabitants during the heat of the 
day in summer, when the climate of the plain is 
intensely hot. This provision might not be neces- 
sary in the interior and cooler parts of the country. 
Our Maundrell gives no further information, save 
that he mentions that the town apjiears to have 
been encompassed on the land side by a double 
wall, defended with towers at small distances ; and 
that without the walls were ditches, ramparts, and 
a kind of bastions faced with hewn stone (Journey, 
p. 72). Pococke speaks chiefly of the ruins. After 
the impulse given to the prosperity of the place 
by the measures of Sheikh Daher, and afterwards 
of Djezzar Pasha, the descriptions differ. Much 
of the old ruins had disappeared from the na- 
tural progress of decay, and from their materials 
having been taken for new works. It is, however, 
mentioned by Buckingham, that, in sinking the 
ditch in front of the then (1816) new outer wall, 
the foundations of small buildings were exposed, 
twenty feet below the present level of the soil, 
which must have belonged to the earliest ages, 
and probably formed part of the original Accho. 
He also thought that traces of Ptolemais might 
be detected in the shafts of grey and red granite 
and marble pillars, which lie about or have been 
converted into thresholds for large doorways, of 
the Saracenic period; some partial remains might 
be traced in the inner walls ; and he is disposed 
to refer to that time the now old khan, which, as 
stated above, was really built by the Emir Fakr- 


ed-tlin. All the Christian ruins mentioned by 
the travellers already quoted had disappeared 
In actual importance, however, the town had 
much increased. The population in 1819 was com- 
puted at 10,000, of whom 3000 were Turks, the rest 
Christians of various denominations (Connor, in 
Jowett, i. 423). Approached from Tyre the city 
presented a beautiful appearance, from the trees in 
the inside, which rise above the wall, and from the 
ground immediately around it on the outside 
being planted with orange, lemon, and palm 
trees. Inside, the streets had the usual narrow- 
ness and filth of Turkish towns; the houses 
solidly built with stone, with fiat roofs ; the ba- 
zaars mean, but tolerably well supplied (Turner, 
ii. 113). The principal objects were the mosque, 
the pasha's seraglio, the granary, and the arsenal 
(Irby and Mangles, p. 195). Of the mosque, 
which was built by Djezzar Pasha, there is a 
description by Pliny Fisk (Life, p. 337 ; also 
G. Robinson, i. 200). The trade was not consider- 
able ; the exports consisted chiefly of grain and 
cotton, the produce of the neighbouring plain ; 
and the imports chiefly of rice, coffee, and sugar 
from Damietta (Turner, ii. ll2). As thus de- 
scribed, the city was all but demolished in 1832 
by the hands of Ibrahim Pasha; and although 
considerable pains were taken to restore it, yet, 
as lately as 1837, it still exhibited a most 
wretched appearance, with ruined houses and 
broken arches in every direction (Lord Lindsay, 
Letters, ii. 81). 

As the fame of Acre is rather modem than bi- 
blical, its history must in this place be briefly 
told. It belonged to the Phoenicians, until they, 
in common with the Jews, were subjugated by the 
Babylonians. By the latter it was doubtless main- 
tained as a military station against Egypt, as it 
was afterwards by the Persians (Strabo, Xvi. p. 877). 
In the distribution of Alexander's dominions Ac- 
cho fell to the lot of Ptolemy Soter, who valued 
the acquisition, and gave it his own name. After- 
wards it fell into the hands of the kings of Syria ; 
and is repeatedly mentioned in the wars of the 
Maccabees. It was at one time the head-quarters 
of their heathen enemies (1 Mace. v. 15, 22, 55). 
In the endeavour of Demetrius Soter and Alex- 
ander Balas to bid highest for the support of Jona- 
than, the latter gave Ptolemais and the lands 
around to the temple at Jerusalem (x. 1, 39). 
Jonathan was afterwards invited to meet Alex- 
ander and the king of Egypt at that place, and 
was treated with great distinction by them (x. 56- 
66) ; but there he at length (b.c. 144) met his 
death through the treachery of Tryphon (xii. 48- 
50). Alexander Jannaeus took advantage of the 
civil war between Antiochus Philometor and An- 
tiochus Cyzicenus to besiege Ptolemais, as the only 
maritime city in those parts, except Gaza, which 
he had not subdued ; but the siege was raised by 
Ptolemy Lathyrus (then king of Cyprus), who 
got possession of the city (Joseph. Antiq. xiii. 
12, 2-6), of which he was soon deprived by his 
mother Cleopatra (xiii. 13, 2). She probably 
gave it, along with her daughter Selene, to Anti- 
ochus Grypus, king of Syria. At least, after his 
death, Selene held possession of that and some 
other Phoenician towns, after Tigranes, king of 
Armenia, had acquired the rest of the kingdom 
(xiii. 10, 4). But. an injudicious attempt to ex- 
tend her dominions dxew upon her the vengeance of 



that conqueror, who, in b.c. 70, reduced Ptolemais, 
and, while thus employed, received with favour 
the Jewish embassy which was sent by Queen Alex- 
andra, with valuable presents, to seek his friendship 
(xiii. 16, 4). A few years after, Ptolemais was ab- 
sorbed,with all the country,into the Roman empire ; 
and the rest of its ancient history is obscure and of 
little note. It is only mentioned in the New Testa- 
ment from St. Paul having spent a day there on 
his voyage to Caesarea (Acts xxi. 7). The import- 
ance acquired by the last-named city through 
the mole constructed by Herod, and the safe 
harbour thus formed, must have had some effect 
on the prosperity of Ptolemais ; but it continued 
a place of importance, and was the seat of a 
bishopric in the first ages of the Christian Church. 
The see was filled sometimes by orthodox and 
sometimes by Arian bishops ; and it has the 
equivocal distinction of having been the birth- 
place of the Sabellian heresy (Niceph. vi. 7). 
Accho, as we may now again call it, was an 
imperial garrison town when the Saracens invaded 
Syria, and was one of those that held out until 
Caesarea was taken by Amru, in a.d. 638 (Mod. 
Univ. Hist. i. 473). 

The Franks first became masters of it in a.d. 
1110, when it was taken by Baldwin, king of Jeru- 
salem. But in a.d. 1 1 87 it was recovered by Salah- 
ed-din, who retained it till a.d. 1191, when it was 
retaken by the Christians. This was the famous 
siege in which Richard Coeur-de-Lion made so 
distinguished a figure. The Christians kept it 
exactly one hundred years, or till a.d. 1291 ; and 
it was the very last place of which they were dis- 
possessed. It had been assigned to the Knights 
Hospitallers of Jerusal em, who fortified it strongly, 
and defended it valiantly, till it was at length 
wrested from them by Khalil ben Kelaoun, Sultan 
of Egypt, who is called Melek Seruf by Christian 
writers (D'Herbelot, in ' Acca ;' Will. Tyr. 1. xxiii. 
c. 6, 7 ; Vitriacus, capp. 25, 99, 100 ; Quaresmius, 
tom.ii. p.897). Under this dominion it remained till 
a.d. 1517, when the Mamluke dynasty was over- 
thrown by Selim I., and all its territories passed 
to the Turks (Chronica de Syria, lib. v. cap. 1 ; 
Mod. Univ. Hist. b. xv. c. 10, § 2). After this Acre 
remained in quiet obscurity till the middle of the 
last century, when the Arab Sheikh Daher took 
it by surprise. Under him the place recovered 
some of its trade and importance. He was suc- 
ceeded by the barbarous but able tyrant Djezzar 
Pasha, who strengthened the fortifications and im- 
proved the town. Under him it rose once more 
into fame, through the gallant and successful 
resistance which, under the direction of Sir Sid- 
ney Smith, it ottered to the arms of Buonaparte. 
After that the fortifications were further strength- 
ened, till it became the strongest place in all 
Syria. In 1832 the town was besieged for nearly 
six months by Ibrahim Pasha, during which 
35,000 shells were thrown into it. and the build- 
ings were literally beaten to pieces (Hogg's Da- 
mascus, pp. 160-166). It had by no means 
recovered from this calamity, when it was sub- 
jected to the operations of (he English licit under 
Admiral Stopford, in pursuance of the plan for 
restoring Syria to the Porte. On the 3rd of No- 
vember, 1840, it was bombarded for several hours, 
when the explosion of the powder-magazine de- 
stroyed the garrison and laid the town in ruins 
(Napier's War in Syria). 




ACCOMMODATION, as used by theological 
writers, has been denned to be the application of 
one thing to another by analogy. This definition, 
however, is far from being complete, as the term, 
at least in modern times, has been used in various 

It has been applied to the form of instruc- 
tion in which it has pleased the Almighty to 
communicate his will to mankind. Thus the 
sensible images and anthropomorphitic expressions 
which were used for the conveyance of divine 
truths, especially in the infancy of mankind, are 
frequently denominated accommodation. To 
express this sense the term divine condescension 
has been also employed. It is meant thereby 
that God, in order to lead mankind to a know- 
ledge of religion and morality, humbled himself 
to the weakness, the prevailing ignorance, modes 
. of thought, and spiritual wants of men, and com- 
municated truths under various images [An- 
thropomorphism]. When it is considered that 
the first oracles of our holy religion are the earliest 
monuments of human thought extant, and pre- 
serve the memorials of the infancy of society, and 
that, in order to attain their end — that of com- 
municating instruction — they must be accommo- 
dated in their form to the prevalent modes of 
thought and language, we may readily perceive 
the reasons for the employment of figurative ex- 
pressions and t} r pical symbols. (See Archbishop 
Whately's Bampton Lectures ; also, Lectures on 
Theology* by the Rev. W. D. Conybeare, Lond. 
1836). This is called divine condescension, 
in order to distinguish it from human, which 
consists in a teacher's adapting himself to the 
modes of thought and imperfections of men, with 
the design of leading them to fresh knowledge 
and better views. This is considered to be a neces- 
sary condescension to the weakness of the ignorant 
and uncivilized. Few, it is maintained,, would 
have received wholesome truths if the teacher had 
not regulated himself according to this system, 
at least, in matters of subordinate import, so far 
as this could be done without prejudice to the 
truth. The person who employs this method is 
said to speak kixt ohcoyofxiav, or economically 
(See Seiler's Biblical Hermeneutics, by the Rev. 
W. Wright, LL.D., Lond. 183-1, § 31, &c). 
Symbols, types, parables, and allegories are in- 
cluded under this form of instruction, of which, 
in all its parts, the inspired teachers, both under 
the former as well as the Christian dispensation, 
are considered to have availed themselves in the 
communication of the divine will. They con- 
formed themselves to the capacities of their 
hearers, and did not think it necessary to refute 
such of their errors as had no connection with 
religious truths. But in modem times, and es- 
pecially within the last half-century, the principle 
of accommodation in dogmatic theology has, in 
the interpretation of the Scriptures, far exceeded 
these limits. While sober interpreters allowed 
that it was the duty of a religious instructor to 
reserve the inculcation of certain religious truths, 
which the hearers were yet inadequate to compre- 
hend, or admitted that the inspired teachers 
adopted the prevailing opinions in natural science, 
or even in regard to genealogical records, or 
points of chronology and other topics unconnected 
with the salvation of mankind — such as the re- 
ceived popular notions respecting demons — or, at 

least, would not disturb the minds of their hearers 
by correcting their notions on such subjects — the 
advocates of this theory, feeling the difficulty of 
fixing the exact limits of the system, or consi- 
dering the only substantial truths to be those of 
natural religion, proceeded to the length of holding 
that all beyond these, including every peculiar 
doctrine of Christianity, was a mere accommoda- 
tion to the prejudices or expectations of their con- 
temporaries. They thus confounded what was 
true, viz., accommodation in the form, with — 
what was inconsistent with the character of a 
divine revelation, or even with that of an upright 
human legislator— accommodation in the matter 
of their instructions ; every thing mysterious -and 
difficult, the very notion that Christianity was a 
revelation from heaven, was said to be merely a 
wise condescension to the weakness of former ages ; 
and this system long continued to be the prevalent 
one in Germany. Others have maintained that the 
sacred writers were themselves not free from the 
errors and prejudices of their countrymen, and that, 
instead of accommodating themselves to these, they 
were only teaching what they believed to be true. 
The question has assumed a new shape since the 
rise and development of this latter view, according 
to which the apostles have been placed, in regard 
to their interpretations, said to be derived from the 
Rabbinical schools, on a level with the mass of their 
countrymen. The general inclination and tend- 
ency of the system is this — that in the New Testa- 
ment we shall find only the opinions of Christ 
and the apostles, and not religious and eternal 
truths. The principle of dogmatical accommo- 
dation, to a certain extent, has, in various degrees,, 
exercised from an early age an influence on the 
interpretation of the Scriptures ; but it did not 
assume its present form before the time of Semler, 
in whose writings we find the germ, at least, of 
that system which has been considered as the most 
formidable weapon ever devised for the destruction 
of Christianity (Rose's Protestantism in Germany, 
p. 75, Lond. 1829). 

The dogmatical accommodation has been also 
called, in latter times, historical interpretation, in 
contradistinction to grammatical, or doctrinal, 
inasmuch as it refers to the alleged transient 
opinions of a peculiar age, which the inspired 
teachers are said to have employed in their in- 
structions. Those who support this theory are 
strongly opposed to verbal, or what they designate 
literal criticism, which they contemn as being 
ban-en, minute, and of little value, as if it had 
reference only to words and syllables ; but ex- 
perience has shown that where verbal criticism 
has been neglected, literature has been unknown 
or uncultivated (Preface to Tittman's Melete- 
mata Sacra. See also Storr, De Sensu Histo- 
rico Sbripturce Sacra;, and his Dissertation on 
the Object of the Death of Christ; also his 
Confidential Letters on the subject of Religion; 
Haupt's Bemerkungen iiber die Lehrart Jesu; 
Heringa, Verhandeling, ten betooge, dat Jesus 
end zyn Apostelen zich doorgaans niet geschikt 
hebben naar de Verkeerde denkbeelden van 
hunne tydgeenooten ; Reason and Revelation, by 
Crusius; Planck's Lntroduction to Theological 
Sciences, in Biblical Cabinet, vol. vii. ; Less's Let' 
ters on the Principle of Accommodation ; Lang,, 
in Flatt's Magazine ; Meyer's Attempt ; Tzschir- 
ner's Memorabilia ; and Starch's Dialogues, pp. 


113-116. The doctrine has been defended, with 
various limitations, by Vogel, in his Aufsatze, 
and in his Manual of Practical Divinity; and 
by Schott, in his Journal for Clergymen. See 
also Bauer's Hermeneutik, § 147-151, p. 121-126; 
and Wright's Setter, § 264-276, p. 418-438 : these 
paragraphs are thus referred to by Jahn, Enchi- 
ridion Hermeneuticae, p. 49). — W. W. 

ACCOMMODATION (exegetical or special) 
is principally employed in the application of cer- 
tain passages of the Old Testament to events in 
the New, to which they had no actual historical 
or typical reference. In this sense it is also called 
illustration. Citations of this description are ap- 
parently very frequent throughout the whole New 
Testament, but especially in the Epistle to the 
Hebrews. As the system of exegetical accom- 
modation has in modern times been the occasion 
of much angry controversy, it will be necessary 
to enter somewhat minutely into its character 
and liistory. 

It cannot be denied that many such passages, 
although apparently introduced as referring to, or 
predictive of, certain events recorded in the New 
Testament, seem to have, in their original con- 
nection, an exclusive reference to quite other ob- 
jects. The difficulty of reconciling such seeming 
misapplications, or deflections from their original 
design, has been felt in all ages, although it has 
been chiefly reserved to recent times to give a 
solution of the difficulty by the theory of accom- 
modation. By this it is meant that the prophecy 
or citation from the Old Testament was not de- 
signed literally to apply to the event in question, 
but that the New Testament writer merely adopted 
it for the sake of ornament, or in order to produce 
a strong impression, by showing a remarkable 
parallelism between two analogous events, which 
had in themselves no mutual relation. 

There is a catalogue of more than seventy of 
these accommodated passages adduced by the 
Rev. T. H. Home, in support of this theory, in his 
Introduction to the Critical Study of the Holy 
Scriptures (vol. ii. part i. ch. iv. sect. 11, p. 343, 
7th ed. 1S34), but it will suffice for our pur- 
pose to select the following specimens, which are 
those given by Jahn, in his Enchiridion Her- 
meneuticce, § 31 : — ■ 

Matt. xiii. 35, cited from Psalm Ixxviii. 2. 
„ viii. 17 „ Isaiah liii. 4.* 

„ ii. 15 „ Hosea xi. 1. 

„ ii. 17,18 „ Jeremiah xxxi. 15. 

„ iii. 3 „ Isaiah xl. 3. 

It will be necessary, for the complete elucida- 
tion of the subject, to bear in mind the distinction 
not only between accommodated passages and 
such as must be properly explained (as those which 
are absolutely adduced as proofs), but also be- 
tween such passages and those which are merely 
borrowed, and applied by the sacred writers, some- 
times in a liighev sense than they were used by the 

* Jalm has observed that the quotation from 
the Old Testament in this passage ' He cast out 
the spirits with his word, and healed all that were 
sick, that ii might be fulfilled which was spoken 
by Esaias, saying. Himself took our infirmities, 
and bare our sicknesses,'' is constantly used in 
its proper sense when cited in other parts of the 
New Testament. 



original authors. Passages which do not strictly 
and literally predict future events, but which can 
be applied to an event recorded in the New Testa- 
ment by an accidental parity of circumstances, 
can alone be thus designated. Such accommo- 
dated passages therefore, if they exist, can only be 
considered as descriptive, and not predictive. 

It will here be necessary to consider the various 
modes in which the prophecies of the Old Testa- 
ment are supposed to be fulfilled in the New. 
For instance, the opinion has been maintained 
by several divines, and is adopted in Mr. 
Home's Introduction, that there is sometimes a 
literal, sometimes only a mediate, typical, or 
spiritual fulfilment. Sometimes a prophecy is 
cited merely by way of illustration ("accommoda- 
tion), while at other times nothing more exists 
than a mere allusion. Some prophecies are sup- 
posed to have an immediate literal fulfilment, and 
to have been afterwards accomplished in a larger 
and more extensive sense; but as the full de- 
velopment of this part of the subject appertains 
more properly to the much controverted question 
of the single and double sense of prophecy, we 
shall here dwell no further on it than to observe, 
that not only are commentators who support the 
theory of a double sense divided on the very im- 
portant question, what are literal prophecies and 
what are only prophecies in a secondary sense, 
but they who are agreed on this question are at 
variance as to what appellation shall be given to 
those passages which are applied by the New Testa- 
ment writers to the ministry of our Saviour, and yet 
historically belong to an antecedent period. In 
order to lessen the difficulty, a distinction has 
been attempted to be drawn, by Dathe and others, 
from the formula with which the quotation is 
ushered in. Passages, for instance, introduced 
by the formula "va irXqpaiOjj, ' that it might be 
fulfilled,' are considered, on this account, as di- 
rect predictions by some, who are willing to con- 
sider citations introduced with the expression 
tot€ iirX-npdiQri, ' then was fulfilled,' as nothing 
more than accommodations. The use of the 
former phrase, as applied to a mere accommoda- 
tion, they maintain is not warranted by Jewish wri- 
ters : such passages, therefore, they hold to be pro- 
phecies, at least in a secondary sense (see Bishop 
Marsh's seventeenth Lecture, in which, however, 
he justly observes, that if all prophecies were to be 
considered such only in a secondary or mystical 
sense, they would lose much of their satisfactory 
character). Bisho}) Kidder {Demonstration of 
the Messias, part ii. p. 81, Lond. 1726) appo- 
sitely observes, in regard to tlus subject, that ' a 
scripture may be said to be fulfilled several ways, 
viz., properly and in the letter, as when that which 
was foretold comes to pass ; or again, when what 
was fulfilled in the type is fulfilled again in the 
antitype ; or else a scripture may be fulfilled more 
improperly, viz., by way of accommodation, as 
when an event happens to any place or people like 
to that which fell out some time before.' He in- 
stances the citation, Matt. ii. 17, ' In Hamuli was 
a voice heard,' &c. ' These words," he adds, ' are 
made use of by way of allusion to express this 
sorrow by. The evangelist doth not say " that it 
might be fulfilled,'' but " then was fulfilled," q.d., 
such another scene took place.' 

It must at the same time be admitted tnat this 
distinction in regard to (he formula of quotation 



is not acknowledged by the majority of commen- 
tators, either of those who admit or of those who 
deny the theory of accommodation. Among the 
former it will suffice to name Calmet, Doddridge, 
Rosenmuller, and Jahn, who look upon passages 
introduced by the formula ' that it might be ful- 
filled,' as equally accommodations with those 
which are prefaced by the words ' then was ful- 
filled ;' while those who deny the accommodative 
theory altogether, consider both as formulas of 
direct prophecies, at least in a secondary or typi- 
cal sense. This, for instance, is the case espe- 
cially in regard to the two citations of this de- 
scription which first present themselves in the 
New Testament, viz. Matt. ii. 15, and Matt. ii. 
17, the former of which is introduced by the 
first, and the latter by the second of these for- 
mulas. But inasmuch as the commentators above 
referred to cannot perceive how the citation from 
Hosea xi. 1, ' Out of Egypt have I called my 
son,' although prefaced by the formula ' that it 
might be fulfilled,' and which literally relates to 
the calling of the children of Israel out of Egypt, 
can be prophetically diverted from its historical 
meaning, they look upon it as a simple accommo- 
dation, or applicable quotation, and consider the "va 
ir\-f]pa>9rj as a Jewish formula of accommodation. 
Mr. Home, after referring in support of this ex- 
plication to some questionable examples from Su- 
renhusius's BifiXos KaraWayTJs, and Rosenmuller 's 
Commentary on the Neio Testament, observes, that 
' it was a familiar idiom of the Jews, when quoting 
the writings of the Old Testament, to say, that it 
might be fulfilled tohich toas spoken by such and 
such a •prophet, not intending it to be understood 
that such a particular passage in one of the sacred 
books was ever designed to be a real prediction of 
what they were then relating, but signifying only 
that the words of the Old Testament might be 
properly adopted to express their meaning and 
illustrate their ideas' (Introduction, vol. ii. part i. 
ch. 4). ' The apostles,' he adds, ' who were Jews 
by birth, and wrote and spoke in the ; Jewish 
idiom, frequently thus cite the Old Testament, 
intending no more by this mode of speaking, than 
that the words of such an ancient writer might 
with equal propriety be adopted to characterize 
any similar occurrence which happened in their 
times. The formula " that it might be fulfilled," 
does not therefore differ in signification from the 
phrase " then was fulfilled," applied in the fol- 
lowing citation in Matt. ii. 17, 18, from Jer. 
xxxi. 15-17, to the massacre of the infants at 
Bethlehem. They are a beautiful quotation, 
and not a prediction of what then happened, 
and are therefore applied to the massacre of 
the infants according not to their original and 
historical meaning, but according to Jewish 
phraseology.' Dr. Adam Clarke, also, in his 
Commentary on Jeremiah (xxxi. 15-17), takes the 
same view : — ' St. Matthew, who is ever fond of 
accommodation, applied these words to the mas- 
sacre of the children of Bethlehem ; that is, they 
were suitable to that occasion, and therefore he 
applied them, but they are not a prediction of that 
event. So opposed, however, was the late Rev. 
Hugh James Rose to this principle of accommo- 
dation, that he included the application of it to 
this very passage among those which ought to ex- 
clude Kuinoel as a commentator from the library 
of the theological student (Supplement to State 


of Protestantism, p. xlii.) ; and the Rev. Chas. 
Forster, in his Critical Essays, p. 59, in which 
he altogether opposes the theory, designates the 
distinction attempted to be drawn by Dathe and 
Bishop Marsh between the formulas of citation 
as " in all its bearings fanciful and licentious." 
Mr. Forster's view is, that in the return of the 
Messiah out of Egypt, and in his return alone, 
the promise of the Lord to Rachel (Jer. xxxi. 16), 
' and they shall come again from the land of 
the enemy,' which was figuratively fulfilled in 
the return of the Jews of the three generations 
from the captivity in Babylon, was adequately and 
literally fulfilled, and that his coming again out 
of Egypt is an event distinctly predicted of the 
Messiah, under the figure of Israel in Egyptian 
bondage (Hos. xi. 1). 

In the same manner he infers that, so far from 
the prophecy in Jer. xxxi. being an accommo- 
dation of the evangelist's, the prophet himself had 
diverted to his immediate purpose (the Babylonish 
captivity), in the way of accommodation only, the 
prophetic type (Gen. xxxv. 16-19) from its proper 
object, the birth of the Messiah at Bethlehem, in 
which the historical type found its literal fulfil- 
ment (Critical Essays, p. 34). 

D. J. G. Rosenmuller gives as examples, which 
he conceives clearly show the use of these for- 
mulas, the passages Matt. i. 22, 23 ; ii. 15, 17, 23 ; 
xv. 7 ; Luke iv. 21 ; . James ii. 23 ; alleging that 
they were designed only to denote that something 
took place which resembled the literal and historical 
sense. The sentiments of a distinguished English 
divine are to the same effect : — ' I doubt not that 
this phrase, " that it might be fulfilled," and the 
like were used first in quoting real prophecies, but 
that this, by long use, sunk in its value, and was 
more vulgarly applied, so that at last it was given 
to scripture only accommodated.' And again, 
' If prophecy could at last come to signify sing- 
ing (Titus i. 12; 1 Sam. x. 10 ; 1 Cor. xiv. 1), 
why might not the phrase fulfilling of Scripture 
and propihecy signify orly quotation' (Nicholl's 
Conference with a Theist, 1698, part iii. p. 13). 

The accommodation theory in exegetics has 
been equally combated by two classes of oppo- 
nents. Those of the more ancient school con- 
sider such mode of application of the Old Testa- 
ment passages not only as totally irreconcilable 
with the plain grammatical construction and ob- 
vious meaning of the controverted passages which 
are said to be so applied, but as an unjustifiable 
artifice, altogether unworthy of a divine teacher ; 
while the other class of expositors, who are to be 
found chiefly among the most modem of the 
German (so called) Rationalists, maintain that the 
sacred writers, having been themselves trained in 
this erroneous mode of teaching, had mistakenly, 
but bond fide, interpreted the passages which they 
had cited from the Old Testament in a sense 
altogether different from their historical meaning, 
and thus anplied them to the history of the Chris- 
tian dispensation. Some of these have maintained 
that the accommodation theory was a mere shift 
(see Rosenmiiller's Historia Interpretationis) 
resorted to by commentators who could not other- 
wise explain the application of Old Testament 
prophecies in the New consistently with the inspi- 
ration of the sacred writers : while the advocates 
of the system consider that the apostles, in adapt- 
ing themselves to the mode of interpretation which 


was customary in their days, and in further 
adopting what may be considered an argument 
e concessis, were employing the most persuasive 
mode of oratory, and the one most likely to prove 
effectual; and that it was therefore lawful to 
adopt a method so calculated to attract- atten- 
tion to their divine mission, which they were at 
all times prepared to give evidence of by other 
and irrefragable proofs. 

We shall conclude with giving a brief sketch 
of the history of this method of interpretation. 
Mr. Stuart, of Andover, in the Excursus to his 
Commentary on Hebrews, alleges that the fathers 
of the church had no hesitation in applying this 
system to the interpretation of the Scriptures. But 
he has furnished us with no example of their cri- 
tical application of it, and any such application 
seems to us scarcely compatible with the allegori- 
cal fancies to which they seem to have been ad- 
dicted. The difference, indeed, had been at all 
times felt, from Origen downwards, between the 
historical sense of the citations, and that to which 
they are applied in the New Testament ; and ex- 
positors have been divided into two classes ; the 
one making the New Testament interpretation 
the rule for the explanation of Old Testament 
passages, and the other attempting, in various 
ways, to reconcile the discrepancy (see Tho- 
luck's Commentary on Hebrews). But the first 
who appears to have led the way to the mode of 
intei-pretation in question, was Theodore of Mop- 
suestia, in the fifth century, who, so far as we can 
judge from the few writings of his which have 
come down to us, was decidedly favourable to 
literal and historical interpretation. He con- 
sidered that the Old Testament contained very 
few direct prophecies of the Messiah, and in re- 
ference to other quotations, such as that in John 
xix. 24, and Rom. x. C, observes that the apostle 
' alters the phrase to suit it to bis argument ' (see 
Tholuck's Commentary on Hebrews). And 
again, in reference to Psalm xxii. 19, Theodore 
observes that the second verse, and consequently 
the psalm itself, cannot possibly refer to Him 
f who did no sin, neither was guile found in His 
mouth ;' but that as our Lord on the cross cited 
the words of the psalm, f My God, my God, why 
hast thou forsaken me V the apostle, on this ac- 
count, accommodated to Christ the words of this 
verse also : ' They parted my garments among 
them, and for my vesture did they cast lots.' 
He seems at the same time to have acknowledged 
the existence of a higher and lower sense, for he 
observes that some passages referring to the Mes- 
siah had been ' hyperbolically applied to his- 
torical personages in the Old Testament,' and 
says of Psalm lxix. 22, that the words may, in 
another sense, be referred to our Lord, although the 
Psalm did not historically refer to him (see 
Rosenm tiller's Historia Interpretationis, vol. iii. 
260). Rosenmtiller conceives, from an expres- 
sion of Nicholas Lyranus, that he (Nicholas) 
had at least a glimpse of this system. But the 
pevson who, ' so far as modem theology is con- 
cerned,' to use the words of the Rev. J. J. Cony- 
beare (Bampton Lectures), ' was the first and most 
eminent patron and advocate of the system ' was 
Calvin, who ' adopted principles of exposition 
which, since the condemnation of Theodore, in the 
fifth century, had scarcely perhaps been heard of, 
and assuredly never been entertained in the 



Christian church.' Erasmus and Luther had, no 
doubt, led the way by their advocacy of the 
literal interpretation ; but, even in passages which 
have been supposed to bear a double relation to the 
Jewish and Christian church, Calvin appears 
rather to ground such application on the nature 
and similarity of the subjects and their condi- 
tion, than upon anything of a distinctly typical 
and prophetical character. He is, therefore, dis- 
posed to look not so much for an intention origin- 
ally spiritual and predictive of higher things, as 
for the authoritative application of a new and 
more extended sense by the inspired craters them- 
selves. On Heb. ii. 6, he remarks. ' that it was not 
the apostle's intention to give the genuine exposi- 
tion of the words, and that no inconvenience can 
result from supposing that the apostle makes allu- 
sions to the Old Testament passage for the sake 
of embellishment.' In regard to the passages in 
Matt. ii. 15-17, already cited, he observes, ' be- 
yond controversy, the passage Hos. xi. 1, must 
not be restricted to Christ ;' and in reference to the 
second quotation (Jerem. xxxi. 15), he says 'it is 
certain that the prophet refers to the slaughter of 
the tribe of Benjamin, which took place in his 
own time ; and Matthew, in citing the words of 
the prophet, does not mean that this was a predic- 
tion of what Herod was about to do, but that 
there was a renewal of the lamentation of the Ben- 
jamites.' And again, 'Non tarn impetratur, quam 
pifi deflexione ad Christi personam accoynmodaf 
(Calvin's Commentary on Hebrews, passim). 

But while the credit of this invention has been 
thus attributed to Calvin, ' a writer, whom on 
the one hand no one will accuse of any Neo- 
logian tendency, while on the other the most 
sober and judicious critic will find nothing in his 
exposition revolting to the strictest mles of just 
interpretation ' (Lectures, &c, by W. D. Cony- 
beare), the doctrine of accommodation, once 'em- 
ployed for the purpose of discarding all spiritual 
and allegorical methods of intei-pretation, was at 
a later period extended to all that had been 
hitherto considered as typical. In England, Dr. 
Sykes, in his answer to Collins, and in the pre- 
face to his Commentary on the Epistle to the 
Hebrews, surrendered the whole scheme of typical 
prefiguration and secondary prophecy, as desti- 
tute of proof, and accommodated to the mission of 
our Lord in condescension to the reigning preju- 
dices of the people. Le Clerc carried Iris notions 
of accommodation to such excess, as nearly to in- 
validate the prophetical character of the Old Testa- 
ment altogether, and considerably to depreciate 
the divine authority of the New ; and Sender 
pronounced all the references made in Scripture 
by our blessed Lord and his disciples, to be the 
mere result of a compliance with the false and 
Rabbinical theories of their unenlightened coun- 

Among those who, in modern times, have most 
ably vindicated the system of the typical inter- 
pretation of prophecy, as opposed to the accom- 
modation theory, is Professor Tholuck, Of Berlin, 
in the Dissertation affixed to his Commentary 
on Hebrews. He does not, indeed, deny all in- 
stances of accommodation, but refers a great 
number of passages which had been so interpreted 
(as Matt. ii. 15, 18; xxvii. 9, 35 ; Jolin iii. 14 ; 
xix. 24, 36 ; Acts i. 20 ; ii. 27-31) to the class 
of typical prophecies. 


The only canon furnished by Professor Tholuck 
for distinguishing between types and accommo- 
dation is, the consideration of the importance of 
the subject to which they are applied — a rule 
which must ever be vague and unsatisfactory. The 
Rev. J. J. Conybeare is of opinion that we are 
* not to look for any secondary sense but what is 
inherent in and consequential on the typical, the 
typical being determined by the real and essential 
points of analogy between the connected objects.' 
Professor Tholuck had been preceded by Bilroth 
in his Commentary on Corinthians, who had ob- 
served in reference to the citation in 1 Cor. i. 19, 
that we are ' not to look for a strict historical 
identity between the meaning which St. Paul 
attaches to the passages, and that entertained by 
their original authors, but merely a connection of 
an analogical kind.' Bilroth then proceeds to vin- 
dicate the sacred writers from the charge of igno- 
rance, if not disingenuousness, by the consideration 
that the Old Testament, taken as a whole, is a 
type of the New. This is the idea on which 
Tholuck has enlarged, and which, he thinks, dis- 
pels all misconception on the subject ; but En- 
roth's translator observes that, if it be meant that 
' the declarations of the prophets, instead of being 
actual descriptions of the coming Messiah, direc.tly 
communicated by divine impulse, were merely 
poetical delineations of persons or events connected 
with Jewish history, and intended by the divine 
Spirit to be typical of what was to happen in after 
times, then were they, correctly speaking, no pro- 
phecies at all, and it was vain and foolish in our 
Lord and his apostles to appeal to the fulfilment 
of them in Him and His church, as a proof that 
he was the Messiah to whom they referred.' The 
writer conceives it to be more philosophical to 
consider the Old Testament passages as having 
the meaning which the apostle ascribes to them, 
than suppose our own interpretation of them to be 
correct, or attempt to explain them in an accom- 
modative or even typical sense. To remark on 
these views would amount to a re-opening of the 
question : we shall, therefore, conclude these ob- 
servations in the words of the temperate and 
judicious -writer whom we have already cited. 

' Although, even the most cautious and un- 
questionably pious expositors of Scripture have 
admitted that some few passages of the Old 
Testament, quoted or referred to in the New, 
must, in the present state of our knowledge, be 
regarded as so applied or accommodated to the 
description and illustration of subjects foreign to 
their original scope and intention, yet it is surely 
unreasonable and uncritical to argue from these 
few to the whole, or even the larger portion of 
those sayings, which we are assured that holy men 
of old uttered, as the spirit directed and enabled 
them' (Bampton Lectures, by J. J. Convbeare, 
Oxford, 1823) — W.W. 

ACCUBATION, the posture of reclining on 
couches at table, which prevailed among the Jews 
in and before the time of Christ. We see no rea- 
son to think that, as commonly alleged, they bor- 
rowed this custom from the Romans after Judea 
had been subjugated by Pompey. But it is best 
known to us as a Roman custom, and as such 
must be described. The dinner-bed, or triclinium, 
stood in the middle of the dining-room, clear of 
the walls, and formed three sides of a square 
which enclosed the table. The open end of the 


square, with the central hollow, allowed the servants 
to attend and serve the table* In all the existing 
representations of the dinner-bed it is shown to 
have been higher than the enclosed table. Among 

the Romans the usual number of guests on 
each couch was three, making nine for the three 
couches, equal to the number of the Muses ; but 
sometimes there were four to each couch. The 
Greeks went beyond this number (Cic. In Pis. 
27) ; the Jews appear to have had no parti- 
cular fancy in the matter, and we know that at 
our Lord's last supper thirteen persons were pre- 
sent. As each guest leaned, during the greater 
part of the entertainment, on his left elbow, so as 
to leave the right arm at liberty, and as two or 
more lay on the same couch, the head of one 
man was near the breast of the man who lay 
behind him, and he was, therefore, said ' to 
lie in the bosom ' of the other. This phrase was 
in use among the Jews (Luke xvi. 22, 23 ; John 
i. 18 ; xiii. 23), and occurs in such a manner as 
to show that to lie next below, or ' in the bosom ' 
of the master of the feast, was considered the most 
favoured place ; and is shown by the citations of 
Kypke and Wetstein (on John xiii. 23) to have 
been usually assigned to near and dear connec- 
tions. So it was 'the disciple whom Jesus loved' 
who 'reclined upon his breast ' at the last supper. 
Lightfoot and others suppose that as, on that oc- 
casion, John lay next below Christ, so Peter, who 
was also highly favoured, lay next above him. 
This conclusion is founded chiefly on the fact of 
Peter beckoning to John that he should ask Jesus 
who was the traitor. But this seems rather to 
prove the contrary — that Peter was not near 
enough to speak to Jesus himself. If he had been 
there, Christ must have lain near his bosom, and 
he would have been in the best position for whis- 
pering to his master, and in the worst for beckon- 
ing to John. The circumstance that Christ was 
able to reach the sop to Judas when he had 
dipped it, seems to us rather to intimate that he 
was the one who filled that place. Any person 
who tries the posture may see that it is not easy 
to deliver anything but to the person next above 
or next below. And this is not in contradiction 
to, but in agreement with, the circumstances. 
The morsel of favour was likely to be given to one 
in a favoured place ; and Judas being so trusted 
and honoured as to be the treasurer and almoner 
of the whole party, might, as much as any other 
of the apostles, be expected to fill that place. 
This also gives more point to the narrative, as 
it aggravates by contrast the turpitude and base- 
ness of his conduct. 

The frame of the dinner-bed was laid with mat- 
tresses variously stuffed, and, latterly, was furnished 
with rich coverings and hangings. Each person 


was usually provided with a cushion or bolster 
on which to support the upper part of his person in 
a somewhat raised position ; as the left arm alone 
could not long without weariness sustain the 
weight. The lower part of the body being ex- 
tended diagonally on the bed, with the feet out- 
ward, it is at once perceived how easy it was for 
' the woman that was a sinner ' to come behind 
between the dinner-bed and the wall, and anoint 
the feet of Jesus (Matt. xxvi. 7 ; Mark xiv. 3). 

The dinner-beds were so various at different 
times, in- different places, and under different cir- 
cumstances, that no one description can apply 
to them all. Even among the Romans they were 
at first (after the Punic war) of rude form 
and materials, and covered with mattresses 
stuffed with rushes or straw ; mattresses of hair 
and wool were introduced at a later period. At 
first the wooden frames were small, low, and 
round; and it was not until the time of Au- 
gustus that square and ornamented couches came 
into fashion. In the time of Tiberius the most 
splendid sort were veneered with costly woods or 
tortoiseshell, and were covered with valuable em- 
broideries, the richest of which came from Baby- 
lon, and cost large sums (U. K. S. Pompeii, ii. 88). 
The Jews perhaps had all these varieties, though 
it is not likely that the usage was ever carried 
to such a pitch of luxury as among the Romans ; 
and it is probable that the mass of the people fed 
in the ancient manner — seated on stools or on the 
ground. It appears that couches were often so 
low, that the feet rested on the ground ; and that 
cushions or bolsters were in general use. It would 
also seem, from the mention of two and of three 
couches, that the arrangement was more usually 
square than semicircular or round (Lightfoot, 
Hor. Heb. in John xiii. 23). 



It is utterly improbable that the Jews derived 
this custom from the Romans, as is constantly 
alleged. They certainly knew it as existing among 
the Persians long before it had been adopted by' the 
Romans themselves (Esth. i. 6 ; vii. 8) ; and the 
presumption is that they adopted it while subject 
to that people. The Greeks also had the usage 
(from the Persians) before the Romans; and with 
the Greeks of Syria the Jews had very much in- 
tercourse. Besides, the Romans adopted the 
custom from the Carthaginians (Val. Max. xii. 
1, 2 ; Liv. xxviii. 2S) ; and, that they had it, 
implies that it previously existed in Phoenicia, in 
the neighbourhood of the Jews. Thus, that in 
the time of Christ the custom had been lately 

adopted from the Romans, is the last of various 
probabilities. It is also unlikely that in so short 
a time it should have become usual and even (as 
the Talmud asserts) obligatory to eat the Passover 
in that posture of indulgent repose, and in no- 
other. All the sacred and profane literature of 
this subject has been most industriously brought 
together by Stuckius (Antiq. Convivalium, ii. 34) - r 
and the works on Pompeii and Herculaneuni sup- 
ply the more recent information. 

ACCURSED. [Anathema.] 

ACCUSER (in© and nn B&£; Sept. 
and New Test. 'Avt'iSikos). The original word, 
which bears this leading signification, means, 
1 . One who has a cause or matter of contention ; 
the accuser, opponent, or plaintiff in any suit 
(Judg. xii. 2 ; Matt. v. 25 ; Luke xii. 58). We 
have little information respecting the manner in 
which causes were conducted in the Hebrew 
courts of justice, except from the Rabbinical au- 
thorities, who,- in matters of this description, may 
be supposed well informed as to the later customs 
of the nation. Even from these we learn little 
more than that great care was taken that, the 
accused being deemed innocent until convicted, 
he and the accuser should appear under equal 
circumstances before the court, that no preju- 
dicial impression might be created to the disad- 
vantage of the defendant, whose interests, we are 
told, were so anxiously guarded, that any one was 
allowed to speak whatever he knew or had to say 
in his favour, which privilege was withheld from 
the accuser (Lewis, Origines Hebrcca, i. 68). 
The word is, however, to be understood in regard 
to the real plaintiff, not to the advocates, who- 
only became known in the later period of the 
Jewish history [Advocate]. 

The word is also applied in Scripture, in the 
general sense, to any adversary or enemy (Luke 
xviii. 3 ; 1 Pet. v. 8). In the latter passage there 
is an allusion to the old Jewish notion that Satan 
was the accuser or calumniator of men before 
God (Job i. 6, sq. ; Rev. xii. 10, sq.*, comp. 
Zech. iii. 1). In this application the forensic 
sense was still retained, Satan being represented 
as laying to man's charge a breach of the law, a3 
in a court of justice, and demanding his punish- 
ment [Satan]. 

ACELDAMA ('A/ceXSa/^, from the Syro- 
Chaldaic, HOT ?j?n, field of blood), the field 
purchased with the money for which Judas be- 
trayed Christ, and which was appropriated as a 
place of burial for strangers (Matth. xxvii. 8; Act3 
i. 19). It was previously 'a potter's field.' The 
field now shown as Aceldama lies on the slope of 
the hills beyond the valley of Hinnom, south of 
Mount Zion. This is obviously the spot which 
Jerome points out ( Onomast. s. v. ' Acheldamach'), 
and which has since been mentioned by almost 
every one who has described Jerusalem. San- 
dys thus writes of it : 'On the south side of this 
valley, neere where it meeteth with the valley of 
Jehoshaphat, mounted a good height on the side 
of the mountain, is Aceldama, or the field of 
blood, purchased with the restored reward of trea- 
son, for a buriall place for strangers. In the 
midst whereof a large square roome was made by 
the mother of Constantine ; the south side, walled 
with the naturall roeke ; flat at the top, and equall 
with the vpper level; out of which ariseth certaine 



little cupoloes, open in the midst to let doune the 
dead bodies. Thorow these we might see Ihe bot- 
tome, all couered with bones, and certaine corses 
but newly let doune, it being now the sepulchre 
of the Armenians. A greedy graue, and great 
enough to deuoure the dead of a -whole nation. 
For they say (and I believe it), that the earth 
thereof within the space of eight and forty houres 
will consume the flesh that is laid thereon ' (Re- 
lation of a Journey, p. 187). He then relates the 
common story, that the empress referred to caused 
270 ship-loads of this flesh-consuming mould to 
be taken to Rome, to form the soil of the Campo 
Sancto, to which the same virtue is ascribed. Cas- 
tela affirms that great quantities of the wondrous 
mould were removed by divers Christian princes 
in the time of the Crusades, and to this source 
assigns the similar sarcophagic properties claimed 
not only by the Campo Santo at Rome, but by 
the cemetery of St. Innocents at Paris, by the 
cemetery at Naples (Le Sainct Voyage de Hieru- 
salem, 1603, p. 150; also Roger, p. 160); and, 
we may add, that of the Campo Santo at Pisa. 

The plot of ground originally bought 'to bury 
strangers in,' seems to have been early set apart 
by the Latins, as well as by the Crusaders, as a 
place of burial for pilgrims (Jac. de Vitriaco, 
p. 64). The charnel-house is mentioned by Sir 
John Mandeville, in the fourteenth century, as 
belonging to the Knights-hospitallers. Sandys 
shows that, early in the seventeenth century, it was 
in the possession of the Armenians. Eugene 
Roger (La,Terre Saincte, p. 161) states that they 
bought it for the burial of their own pilgrims, and 
ascribes the erection of me charnel-house to them. 
They still possessed it in the time of Maundrell, 
or rather rented it, at a sequin a day, from the 
Turks. Corpses were still deposited there; and 
the traveller observes that they were in various 
stages of decay, from which he conjectures that 
the grave did not make that quick dispatch with 
the bodies committed to it which had been re- 
ported. 'The earth, hereabouts,' he observes, 'is 
of a chalky substance ; the plot of ground was not 
above thirty yards long by fifteen wide; and a 
moiety of it was occupied by the charnel-house, 
which was twelve yards high' (Journey, p. 136). 
Richardson (Travels, p. 567) affirms that bodies 
were thrown in as late as 1S18; but Dr. Robin- 
son alleges that it has the appearance of having 
been for a much longer time abandoned: 'The 
field or plat is not now marked by any boundary 
to distinguish it from the rest of the hill-side ; and 
the former charnel-house, now a ruin, is all that 
remains to point out the site. .. .An opening at 
each end enabled us to look in; but the bottom 
was empty and dry, excepting a few bones much 
decayed' (Biblical Researches, L 524). 

ACHAIA ('Axcrf'a), a region of Greece, which 
in the restricted sense occupied the north-western 
portion of the Peloponnesus, including Corinth 
and its isthmus (Strabo, viii. p. 438, sq.). By 
the poets it was often put for the whole of 
Greece, whence 'A^atoi, the Greeks. Under 
the Romans, Greece was divided into two pro- 
vinces, Macedonia and Achaia, the former of 
which included Macedonia proper, with Illyri- 
cum, Epirus, and Thessaly ; and the latter, all that 
lay southward of the former (Cellar, i. p. 1170, 
1022). It is in this latter acceptation that 
the name of Achaia is always employed in the 


New Testament (Acts xviii. 12, 16; xix. 21; 
Rom. xv. 26; xvi. 25; 1 Coivxvi. 15; 2 Cor. 
i. 1 ; ix. 2 ; xi. 10 ; 1 Thess. i. 7, 8). Achaia 
was at first a senatorial province, and, as such, was 
governed by proconsuls (Dion Cass. liii. p. 704). 
Tiberius change I the two into one imperial • pro- 
vince under procurators (Tacit. Annal. i. 76); but 
Claudius restored them to the senate and to the 
proconsular form of government (Suet. Claud. 25). 
Hence the exact and minute propriety with which 
St. Luke expresses himself in giving the title of 
proconsul to Gallio, who was appointed to the 
province in the time of Claudius (Acts xviii. 12). 

ACHAICUS ('Axa'tKos), a native of Achaia, 
and a follower of the apostle Paul. He, with 
Stephanus and Fortunatus, was the bearer of the 
1st Epistle to the Corinthians, and was recom- 
mended by the apostle to their special respect 
(1 Cor. xvi. 17). 

ACHAN (15^; Sept. "Axcw, or "Axap, Josh, 
vii. 1). In the parallel passage (1 Chron. ii. 7) the 
name is spelt "QJJ, and as it has there the meaning 
of troubling, it is thought by some that this is an 
intentional change, after the fact, to give the name 
a significant reference to the circumstance which 
renders it notorious. The city of Jericho, before 
it was taken, was put under that awful ban, of 
which there are other instances in the early Scrip- 
ture history, whereby all the inhabitants (except- 
ing Rahab and her family) were devoted to 
destruction, all the combustible goods to be con- 
sumed by fire, and all the metals to be conse- 
crated to God. This vow of devotement was 
rigidly observed by all the troops when Jericho 
was taken, save by one man, Achan, a Judahite, 
who could not resist the temptation of secreting 
an ingot of gold, a quantity of silver, and a costlj 
Babylonish garment, which he buried in his 
tent, deeming that his sin was hid. But God 
made known this infraction, which, the vow 
having been made by the nation as one body, had 
involved the whole nation in his guilt. The 
Israelites were defeated, with serious loss, in their 
first attack upon Ai ; and as Joshua was well as- 
sured that tliis humiliation was designed as the 
punishment of a crime which had inculpated the 
whole people, he took immediate measures to dis- 
cover the criminal. As in other cases, the matter 
was referred to the Lord by the lot, and the lot 
ultimately indicated the actual criminal. The 
conscience-stricken offender then confessed his 
crime to Joshua ; and his confession being verified 
by the production of his ill-gotten treasure, the 
people, actuated by the strong impulse with which 
men tear up, root and branch, a polluted thing, 
hurried away not only Achan, but his tent, his 
goods, his spoil, his cattle, his children, to the 
valley (afterwards called) of Achor, north of 
Jericho, where they stoned him, and all that be- 
longed to him ; after which thp whole was con- 
sumed with fire, and a cairn of stones raised 
over the ashes. The severity of this act, as re- 
gards the family of Achan, has provoked some 
remark. Instead of vindicating it, as is generally 
done, by the allegation that the members of 
Achan's family were probably accessories to his 
crime after the fact, we prefer the supposition that 
they were included in the doom by one of those 
sudden impulses of indiscriminate popular ven- 
geance to which the Jewish people were exceed- 


mgly prone, and which, in this case, it would not 
have been in the power of Joshua to control by 
any authority which he could under such circum- 
stances exercise. It is admitted that this is no 
more than a conjecture : but, as such, it is at 
least worth as much, and assumes considerably- 
less, than the conjectures which have been offered 
by others (Josh. vii.). 

ACHAR. [Achan.] 

ACHASHDARPENIM (tiV$pf PI*? ; Sept. 
crarpairai and tTTparriyoi ; Vulg. satrapce ; A. V. 
' rulers of provinces.' It occurs in Esth. iii. 12; 
viii. 9 ; ix. 3 ; and with the Chaldee termination 
an, in Dan. iii. 2, 3, 27 ; vi. 2, 3). The word is 
undoubtedly merely another form of writing the 
Persian word satrap, the origin of which has been 
much disputed, and does not claim to be here 
considered. These satraps are known in ancient 
history as the governors or viceroys of the pro- 
vinces into which the Persian empire was divided. 
Strictly speaking, they had an extended civil 
jurisdiction over several smaller provinces, each 
of which had its own nHQ or governor. Thus 
Zerubbabel and Nehemiah were ' governors ' of 
Judea, under the Persian satraps of Syria (Ezra, 
iv. 3, 6 ; Neh. ii. 9). The power and functions 
of the Persian satraps were not materially dif- 
ferent from those of the modem Persian governors 
and Turkish pashas ; and, indeed, the idea of 
provincial government by means of viceroys, en- 
trusted with almost regal powers in their several 
jurisdictions, and responsible only to the king, by 
whom they are appointed, has always been pre- 
valent in the East. The important peculiarity 
and distinction in. the ancient Persian govern- 
ment, as admirably shown by Heeren (Researches, 
i. 489, sq.), was that the civil and military powers 
were carefully separated : the satrap being a very 
powerful civil and political chief, but having no 
immediate control over the troops and garrisons, 
the commanders of which were responsible only to 
the king. The satraps, in their several provinces, 
employed themselves in the maintenance of order 
and the regulation of affairs ; and they also col- 
lected and remitted to the court the stipulated 
tribute, clear of all charges for local government 
and for the maintenance of the troops (Xenoph. 
Cyrop. viii. 6, § 1-3). In later times this prudent 
separation of powers became neglected, in favour 
of royal princes and other great persons (Xenoph. 
Anab. i. 1, § 2), who were entrusted with the mi- 
litary as well as civil power in their govern- 
ments ; to which cause may be attributed the 
revolt of the younger Cyrus, and the other rebel- 
lions and civil wars, which, by weakening the 
empire, facilitated its ultimate subjugation by 

ACHBAR. [Mouse.] 

ACHISH (K^pX, signification uncertain ; 
Sept. 'Ayx°Ss> also 'Apxis, 'Axis, called Abime- 
lech in the title of Ps. xxxiv.), the Philistine 
king of Gafh, with whom David twice sought re- 
fugerwhen he fled from Saul (1 Sam. xxi. 10-15 ; 
xxvii. 1-3). The first time David was in im- 
minent danger ; fur he was recognised and spoken 
of by the officers of the court as one whose glory 
had been won at the cost of the Philistines. This 
talk filled David with such alarm that he feigned 
himself mad when introduced to the notice of 
Achish, who, seeing him ' scrabbling unon the 



doors of the gate, and letting his spittle fail down 
upon his beard,' rebuked his people sharply for 
bringing him to his presence, asking, ' Have I 
need of madmen, that ye have brought this fellow 
to play the madman in my presence ? Shall this 
fellow come into my house ?" After this David 
lost no time in quitting the territories of Gafh. 
Winer illustrates David's conduct by reference to 
the similar proceeding of some other great men, 
who feigned themselves mad in difficult circum- 
stances — as Ulysses (Cic. Off. iii. 26 ; Hygin. 
f. 95, Schol. ad Lycophr. 81 S), the astronomer 
Meton (vElian, Hist xiii. 1 2), L. Junius Brutus 
(Liv. i. 56 ; Dion. Hal. iv. 68), and the Arabian 
king Bacha (Schultens, Anth. Vet. Hamasa, p. 
535). About four years after, when the character 
and position of David became better known, and 
when he was at the head of not less than 600 reso- 
lute adherents, he again repaired with his troop 
to King Achish, who received him in a truly 
royal spirit, and treated him witli a generous con- 
fidence, of which David took rather more advan- 
tage than was creditable to him [David]. 

ACHMETHA (KfllpflK, Ezra vi. 2; 'E/c- 
fidrava, 2 Mace. ix. 3 ; Judith xi. 1 ; Tob. v. 9 ; 
Joseph. Antiq. x. 11, 7 ; xi. 4, 6 ; also, in Greek 
authors, ''Eyfidrava and 'Ayfidrava), a city in 
Media. The derivation of the name is doubtful ; 
but Major Rawlfhson {Geogr. Journal, x. 134) has 
left little question that the title was applied exclu- 
sively to cities having a fortress for the protection 
of the royal treasures. In Ezra we learn that in 
the reign of Darius Hystaspes the Jews petitioned 
that search might be made in the king's treasure- 
house at Babylon, for the decree which Cyrus had 
made in favour of the Jews (Ezra v. 17). Search 
was accordingly made in the record-office ('house 
of the rolls"), where the treasures were kept at Ba- 
bylon (vi. 1) : but it appears not to have been found 
there, as it was eventually discovered ' at Ach- 
metha, in the palace of the province of the Medes' 
(vi. 2). It is here worthy of remark, that, the 
LXX. regarded ' Achmetha,' in which they could 
hardly avoid recognising the familiar title of 
Ecbatana, as the generic name for a city, and, ac- 
cordingly, rendered it by ttSXis ; and that Jo- 
sephus, as well as all the Christian Greeks, while 
retaining the proper name of Ecbatana, yet agree, 
with the Greek Scriptures, in employing the word 
fidpis to express the Hebrew ^DTD, Biriha 
(' the palace '), which is used as the distinctive 
epithet of the city. 

In Judith i. 2-4, there is a brief account of 
Ecbatana, in which we are told that it was built 
by Arphaxad, king of the Medes, who made it. 
his capital. It was built of hewn stones, and 
surrounded by a high and thick wall, furnished 
with wide gates and strong and lofty towers. Hero- 
dotus ascribes its foundation to Dejoces, in obe- 
dience to whose commands the Medes etexited 
' that great and strong city, now known under 
the name of Agbatana, where the walls are built 
circle within circle, and are so constructed that 
each inner circle overtops its outer neighbour by 
the height of the battlements alone. This was 
effected partly by the nature of the ground, a 
conical hill, and partly by the building itself. 
The number of the circles was seven, and within 
the innermost was the palace of the treasury. 
The battlements of the first circle were white, of 



the second black, of the third scarlet, of the fourth 
blue, of the fifth orange ; all these were brilliantly- 
coloured with different pigments ; but the battle- 
ments of the sixth circle were overlaid with silver, 
aud of the seventh with gold. Such were the pa- 
lace and the surrounding fortification that Dejoces 
constructed for himself : but he ordered the mass of 
the Median nation to construct their houses in a 
circle around the outer wall (Herodot. i. 98). It is 
contended by Major Rawlinson {Geogr. Journal, 
x. 1 27) that this story of the seven walls is a fable 
of Sabsean origin, the seven colours mentioned 
being precisely those employed by the Orientals to 
denote the seven great heavenly bodies, or the seven 
climates in which they revolve. He adds (p. 128), 
' I cannot believe that at Agbatana the walls 
were really painted of these colours : indeed, 
battlements with gold and silver are manifestly 
fabulous ; nor do I think that there ever could 
have been even seven concentric circles : but in 
that early age, where it is doubtful whether mith- 
raicism, or fire-worship, had originated in this 
part of Asia, it is not at all improbable that, ac- 
cording to the Sabaean superstitions, the city 
should have been dedicated to the seven heavenly 
bodies, and perhaps a particular part assigned to 
the protection of each, with some coloured device 
emblematic of the tutelar divinity.' 

This Ecbatana has been usually identified 
with the present Hamadan. Major Rawlinson, 
however, while admitting that Hamadan occupies 
the site of the Median Ecbatana, has a learned 
and most elaborate paper in the Geographical 
Journal (x. 65-15S ; On the Site of the Atropa- 
tenian Ecbatana), in which he endeavours to 
show that the present Takht-i-Suleiman was the 
site of another, the Atropatenian Ecbatana ; 
and that to it, rather than to the proper Median 
Ecbatana, the statement in Herodotus and most 
of the other ancient accounts are to be understood 
to refer. Our only business is with the Achmetha 
of Ezra ; and that does not require us to enter into 
this question. The major, indeed, seems inclined 
to consider the Ecbatana of the apocryphal books 
as his Atropatenian Ecbatana ; but is rather more 
doubtful in claiming it as the Achmetha of Ezra. 
But without undertaking to determine what 
amount of ancient history should be referred to 
the one or to the other, we feel bound to conclude 
that Hamadan was the site of the Achmetha of 
Ezra, and the Ecbatana of the Apocrypha : 1. Be- 
cause it is admitted that the Median Ecbatana 
was a more ancient and more anciently great city 
than the Atropatenian metropolis. 2. Because 
the name ' Achmetha - may easily, through the 
Syrian Ahmethan, and the Armenian Ahmetan, 
be traced in the Persian Hamadan. 3. And be- 
cause all the traditions of the Jews refer to Ha- 
madan as the site of the Achmetha and Ecbatana 
of their Scriptures. 

Hamadan is still an important town, and the 
seat of one of the governments into which the Per- 
sian kingdom is divided. It is situated in north 
lat. 34° 53', east long. 40°, at the extremity of a 
rich and fertile plain, on a gradual ascent, at the 
base of the Elwund Mountains, whose higher sum- 
mits are covered with perpetual snow. Some rem-» 
nants of ruined walls of great thickness, and also 
of towers of sun-dried bricks, present the only 
positive evidence of a more ancient city than the 
present on the same spot. Heaps of compara- 


tively recent ruins, and a wall fallen to decay, 
attest that Hamadan lias declined from even its 
modern importance. The population is said by 
Southgate to be about 30,000, which, from wnat 
the present writer has seen of the place, he should 
judge to exceed the truth very considerably. It 
is little distinguished, inside, from other Persian 
towns of the same rank, save by its excellent and 
well-supplied bazaars, and the unusually large 
number of khans of rather a superior description. 
This is the result of the extensive transit trade of 
which it is the seat, it being the great centre 
where the routes of traffic between Persia, Meso- 
potamia, and Persia converge and meet. Its own 
manufactures are chiefly in leather. Many Jews 
reside here, claiming to be descended from those of 
the Captivity who remained in Media. Benjamin 
of Tudela says that in his time the number was 
50,000. Modern travellers assign them 500 
houses ; but the Rabbi David de Beth Hillel 
{Travels, pp. S5-S7, Madras^ 1832), who was not 
likely to understate the fact, and had the best 
means of information, gives them but 200 families. 
He says they are mostly in good circumstances, 
having fine houses and gardens, and are chiefly 
traders and goldsmiths. They speak the broken 
Turkish of the country, and have two synagogues. 
They derive the name of the town from '■Hainan?. 
and 'Mede,' and say that it was given to that foe of 
Mordecai by King Ahasuerus. In the midst of the 
city is a tomb which is in their charge, and which 
is said to be that of Mordecai and Esther. It is 
a plain structure of brick, consisting of a small 
cylindrical tower and a dome (the whole about 
20 feet high), with small projections or wings on 
three sides. Within are two apartments — a small 
porch formed by one of the wings, and beyond 
it the tomb-chamber, which is a plain room 
paved with glazed tiles. In the midst, over the 
spots where the dead are supposed to lie, are two 
large wooden frames or chests, shaped like sarco- 
phagi, with inscriptions in Hebrew and flowers 
carved ujion them. There is another inscription 
on the wall, in bas-relief, which, as translated by 
Sir Gore Ouseley, describes the present tomb as 
having been built over the graves of Mordecai 
and Esther by two devout Jews of Kashan, in 
a.m. 4474. The original structure is said to 
have been destroyed when Hamadan was sacked 
by Timour. As Ecbatana was then the sum- 
mer residence of the Persian court, it is pro- 
bable enough that Mordecai and Esther died 
and were buried there ; and traditional testi- 
mony, taken in connection with this fact, and 
with such a monument in a place where Jews 
have been permanently resident, is better evidence 
than is usually obtained for the allocation of an- 
cient sepulchres. The tomb is in charge of the 
Jews, and is one of their places of pilgrimage. 
Kinneir, Ker Porter, Morier, Frazer, and South- 
gate furnish the best accounts of modern Ha- 

History mentions another Ecbatana, in Pales- 
tine, at the foot of Mount Carmel, towards Ptole- 
mais, where Cambyses died (Herod, iii. 64 : 
Plin. v. 19). It is not mentioned by this or any 
similar name in the Hebrew writings : and we 
are at a loss to discover the grounds which Major 
Rawlinson says exist for concluding that there 
was a treasury in this position {Geogr. Journ. 
x. 134). 

in texture, and some possessed of acrid and even 
poisonous properties. None, therefore, of the Algce 
can be intended, nor any species of Butomus. The 
different kinds of Juncus, or rush, though abound- 
ing in such situations, are not suited for pastur- 
age, and in fact are avoided by cattle. So are the 


ACHOR ObjJ ; Sept. 'A X dp), a valley be- 
tween Jericho and Ai, which received this name 
(signifying trouble) from the trouble brought 
upon the Israelites by the sin of Achan (Josh, 
vii. 24) [Achan]. 

ACHSAH (HMJJ, an anklet; Sept. 'Ax<rd), ^ferity of the Cyperacea "irTedge tribe; and 
the daughter of Caleb, whose hand her father a ] s0 the numerous species of Carex, which grow in 
offered in marriage to him who should lead the mo i s t situations, yet yield a very coarse grass, 
attack on the city of Debir, and take it. The wn i cn j s scarcely if ever touched by cattle. A few 
prize was won by his nephew Othniel ; and as species of Cyperus serve as pasturage, and the roots 
the bride was conducted with the usual cere- f som e of them are esculent and aromatic ; but 
mony to her future home, she alighted from these must be dug up before cattle can feed on 
her ass, and sued her father for an addition of them. Some species of scirpus, or club-rush, how- 
springs of water to her dower in lands. It is everj serve as food for cattle : S. cespitosus, for in- 
probable that custom rendered it unusual, or at stance, is the principal food of cattle and sheep in 
least ungracious, for a request tendered under the highlands of Scotland, from the beginning of 
such circumstances by a daughter to be refused ; March till the end of May. Varieties of S. mari- 

and Caleb, in accordance with her wish, bestowed 
upon her 'the upper and the nether springs ' (Josh, 
xv. 16-19; Judg. i. 9-15). 

ACHSHAPH («)^?N ; Sept. 'A#<fc 'A X crd<p, 
and 'Ax'V)' a !'°y a l cr *y o4> the Canaanites (Josh. 
xi. 1), has been supposed by many to be the 
same as Achzib, both being in the tribe of 
Asher. But a careful consideration of Josh. xix. 
25 and 29, will make it probable that the places 
were different. There is more reason in the 
conjecture (Hamelsveld, iii. 237) that Achshaph 
was another name for Accho or Acre, seeing 
that Accho otherwise does not occur in the list 
of towns in the lot of Asher, although it is 
certain, from Judg. i. 31, that Accho was in the 
portion of that tribe. 

ACHU (-inN). This word occurs in Job viii. 
11, where it is said, ' Can the rush grow up with- 
out mire? can the flag grow without water?' 
Here flag stands for achu; which would seem to 
indicate some specific plant, as gome, or rush, in 
the first clause of the sentence, may denote the 
papyrus. Acini occurs also twice in Gen. xli. 2, 
IS, ' And, behold, there came up out of the river 
seven well-favoured kine and fat-fleshed, and they 
fed in a meadoio : ' here it is rendered meadow, 
and must, therefore, have been considered by our 
translators as a general, and not a specific term. 
In this difficulty it is desirable to ascertain the 
interpretation put upon the word by the earlier 
translators. Dr. Harris lias already remarked that 
* the word is retained in the Septuagint, in Gen. 
iv t<3 &x el 5 an< ^ * s use( l by the son of Sirach, 
Eccles. xi. 16, &x i or ^-X fiI > ^ 0I tne copies vary. 
Jerome, in his Hebrew questions or traditions on 
Genesis, writes ' Acid neque Graecus 6ermo est, 
nee Latinus, sed et Hebraius ipse cprruptus est.' 
The Hebrew vau ) and iod ' being like one 
another, differing only in length, the LXX., he 
observes, wrote TIN, achi, for "inN, achu, and 

timus, found in different countries, and a few of 
the numerous kinds of Cyperaceae common in 
Indian pastures, as Cyperus clubius and hexa- 
stachyus, are also eaten by cattle. Therefore, if 
any specific plant is intended, as seems implied in 
what goes before, it is perhaps one of the edible 
species of scirpus or cyperus, perhaps C.esculentus, 
which, however, has distinct Arabic names : or 
it may be a true grass ; some species of panicum, 
for instance, which form excellent pasture in 
warm countries, and several of which grow lux- 
uriantly in the neighbourhood of water. 

[Cyperus esculent us.] 

But it is well known to all acquainted with 
warm countries subject to excessive drought, that 
the only pasturage to which cattle can resort 
is a green ship of different grasses, witli some 
sedges, which runs along the banks of rivers or of 
pieces of water, varying more or less in breadth 
according to the height of the bank, that is, the dis- 
tance of water from the surface. Cattle emerging 

according to their usual custom put the Greek % from rivers, which they may often be seen doing 

for the double aspirate T\ (Nat. Hist, of the in hot countries, as has been well remarked by the 

Bible, in < Flag '). editor of the 'Pictorial Bible' on Gen. xli. 2, would 

From the context of the few passages in which naturally go to such green herbage as intimated 

(icAw, occurs, it is evident that it indicates a in this passage of Genesis, arid' which, as indicated 

plant . or plants which grew in or in the neigh- 
bourhood of water, and also that it or they were 
suitable as pasturage for cattle. Now it is gene- 
rally well known that most of the plants which 
grow in water, as well as many of those which 

in Job xviii. 2, could not grow without water in 
a warm dry country and climate. As no similar 
name is known to" be applied to any plant or 
plants in Hebrew, endeavours have been mad.- to 
find a similar one so applied in the cognate lan- 

grow in its vicinity, are not well suited as food for guages; and, as quoted by Dr. Harris, the learned 
cattle; some being very watery, others very coarse Chapellon says, 'we have no radix for -lnN 




unless we derive it, as Schultens does, from the 
Arabic achi, to bind or join together.'' Hence it 
has been inferred that it might be some one of the 
grasses or sedges employed in former times, as 
some still are, for making ropes. But there is 
probably some other Arabic root which has not yet 
been ascertained, or which may have become ob- 
solete; for there are numerous words in the Arabic 
language having reference to greenness, all of 
which have akh as a common element. Thus 

, ujU^s-l akhyas, thickets, dark groves, places full 

of reeds or flags, in which animals take shelter ; 

/ yj\ c^y.) akhevas, putting forth leaves ; so akh- 

zirar, greenness, verdure ; akhchishab, abounding 
in grass. These may be connected with kah, 
a common term for grass in Northern India, 
derived from the Persian, whence amber is called 
kah-robehij, grass-attracter. So Jerome, with 
reference to achic, says, " Cum ab eruditis quas- 
rerem, quid hie sermo significaret, audivi ab 
.(Egyptis hoc nomine lingua eorum omne quod in 
palude virens nascitur appellari." — J. F. R. 

ACHZIB (l^pK). There were two places 
of this name, not usually distinguished. 

1. Achzib (Sept. 'AcrxaCO' m * ne tribe of Asher 
nominally, but almost always in the possession of 
the Phoenicians ; being, indeed, one of the places 
from which the Israelites were unable to expel the 
former inhabitants (Judg. i. 31). In the Tal- 
mud it is called Chezib. The Greeks called 
it Ecdippa, from the Aramsan pronunciation 
3H3X (Ptol. v. 15) ; and it still survives under 
the name of Zib. It is upon the Mediterranean 
coast, about ten miles north of Acre. It stands 
on an ascent close by the sea-side, and is described 
as a small place, with a few palm-trees rising 
above the dwellings (Pococke, ii. 115; Richter, 
p. 70 ; Maundrell, p. 71 ; Irby and Mangles, 
p. 196 ; Buckingham, ch. iii.). 

2. Achzib (Sept. 'Ax(zfi) in the tribe of Judah 
(Josh. xv. 44 ; Mic. i. 14), of which there is no 
historical mention, but, from its place in the cata- 
logue, it appears to have been in the middle part 
of the western border-land of the tribe, towards 
the Philistines. This is very possibly the Chezib 
(^D) of Gen. xxxviii. 5. 

ACRA Q'AKpa), a Greek word, signifying a 
citadel, in which sense NIpH also occurs in the 
Syriac and Chaldaic. Hence the name of Acra 
was acquired by the eminence north of the Tem- 
ple, on which a citadel was built by Antiochus 
Epiphanes, to command the holy place. It thus 
became, in fact, the Acropolis of Jerusalem. 
Josephus describes this eminence as semicircular; 
and reports that when Simon Maccabseus had 
succeeded in expelling the Syrian garrison, he not 
only demolished the citadel, but caused the hill 
itself to be levelled, that no neighbouring site 
might thenceforth be higher or so high as that on 
which the temple stood. The people had suffered 
so much from the garrison, that they willingly 
laboured day and night, for three years, in this 
great work (Antiq. xiii. 6. 6 ; Bell. Jud. v. 4. 1). 
At a later period the palace of Helena, queen of 
Adiabene, stood on the site, which still retained 
the name of Acra, as did also, probably, the coun- 
cil-house, and the repository of the archives 

(Bell. Jud. vi. 6. 3; see also Descript. Urbis Iero- 
solymce, per J. Heydenum, lib. iii. cap. 2). 

1. ACRABATTENE, a district or toparchy 
of Judsea, extending between Shechem (now Na- 
bulus) and Jericho, inclining east. If was about 
twelve miles in length. It is not mentioned in 
Scripture, but it occurs in Josephus (Bell. Jud. ii. 
12, 4; iii. 3, 4, 5). It took its name from a town 
called Acrabi in the Onomasticon, s.Y.'AKpapfieiu, 
where it is described as a large village, nine 
Roman miles east of Neapolis, on the road to 
Jericho. In this quarter Dr. Robinson (Bib. lie- 
searches, iii. 103) found a village still existing 
under the name of Akrabeh. 

2. ACRABATTENE, another district in that 
portion of Judtea, which lies towards the south 
end of the Dead Sea, occupied by the Edomites 
during the Captivity, and afterwards known as 
Idumsea. It is mentioned in 1 Mace. v. 3; 
Joseph. Antiq. xii. 8. 1. It is assumed to have 
taken its .name from the Maaleh Akrabbim 
(D^lpJ) f"6y£>), or Steep of the Scorpions, men- 
tioned in Num. xxxiv. 4, and Josh. xv. 3, as 
the southern extremity of the tribe of Judah 

ACRE. [Accho.] 

title of one of the canonical books of the New Testa- 
ment, the fifth in order in the common arrange- 
ment, and the last of those properly of an historical 
character. Commencing with a reference to an 
account given in a former work of the sayings 
and doings of Jesus Christ before his ascension, 
its author proceeds to conduct us to an acquaint- 
ance with the circumstances attending that event, 
the conduct of the disciples on their return from 
witnessing it, the outpouring .onjhem of the Holy 
Spirit according to Christ's promise to them be- 
fore his crucifixion, and the amazing success 
which, as a consequence of this, attended the first 
announcement by them of the doctrine concerning 
Jesus as the yjfornised Messiah and the Saviour 
of the World. After following the fates of the 
mother-church at Jerusalem up to the period 
when the violent persecution of its members by 
the rulers of the Jews had broken up their society 
and scattered them, with the exception of the 
apostles, throughout the whole of the surrounding 
region ; and after introducing to the notice of the 
reader the case of a remarkable conversion of one 
of the most zealous persecutors of the church, who 
afterwards became one of its most devoted and 
successful advocates, the narrative takes a wider 
scope and opens to our view the gradual expansion 
of the church by the free admission within its 
pale of persons direct! j converted from heathenism 
and who had not passed through the preliminary 
stage of Judaism. The first step towards this 
more liberal and cosmopolitan order of things 
having been effected by Peter, to whom the 
honour of laying the foundation of the Christian 
church, both within and without the confines of 
Judaism, seems, in accordance with our Lord's 
declaration concerning him (Matt. xvi. IS), to 
have been reserved, Paul, the recent convert and 
the destined apostle of the Gentiles, is brought 
forward as the main actor on the scene. On his 
course of missionary activity, his successes and 
his sufferings, the chief interest of the narrative 
is thenceforward concentrated, until, having fol- 
lowed him to Rome, whither he had been sent as 


a prisoner to abide his trial, on his own appeal, at 
the bar of the emperor himself, the book abruptly 
closes, leaving us to gather further information 
concerning him and the fortunes of the church 
from other sources. 

Respecting the authorship of this book there 
can be no ground for doubt or hesitation. It is, 
unquestionably, the production of the same writer 
by whom the third of the four Gospels was com- 
posed, as is evident from the introductory sen- 
tences of both (comp. Luke i. 1-4, with Acts i. 1). 
That this writer was Luke has not in either case 
* been called in question. With regard to the book 
now under notice tradition is firm and constant 
in ascribing it to Luke (Irenaeus. Adv. liar. lib. i. 
c. 31 ; iii. 14; Clemens Alexandr. Strom.v. p.5SS; 
Tertullian, Adv. Marcion. v. 2; De Jejtm. c. 10 ; 
Origen, apud Euseb. Hist. 'Eccles. vi. 23, &c. 
Eusebius himself ranks this book among the 
dfji.otoyov/.iei'a, H. E. iii. 25). From the book itself, 
also, it appears that the author accompanied Paul 
to Rome when he went to that city as a prisoner 
(xxviii.). Now, we know from two epistles 
written by Paul at that time, that Luke was with 
him at Rome (Col. iv. 14; Phil. 24), which 
favours the supposition that he was the writer of 
the narrative of the apostle's journey to that city. 
The only parties in primitive times by whom this 
book was rejected were certain heretics, such as 
the Marcionites, the Severians, and the Mani- 
cheans, whose objections were entirely of a dog- 
matical, not of a historical nature ; indeed, 'ftrey 
cafrtlaTdly be said to have questioned the authen- 
ticity of the book ; they rather cast it aside be- 
cause it did not favour, their peculiar views. At 
the same time, whilst this book was acknowledged 
as genuine where it was known, it does not ap- 
pear to have been at first so extensively circulated 
as the other historical books of the New Testa- 
ment ; for we find Chrysostom complaining that 
by many in his day it was not so much as 
known (Horn. i. in Act. sub init.). Perhaps, 
however, there is some rhetorical exaggeration in 
this statement; or, it may be, as Kuinoel (Proleg. 
in Acta App. Comment, torn. iv. p. 5) suggests, 
that Chrysostom 's complaint refers rather to a 
prevalent omission of the Acts from the number 
of books publicly read in the churches, which 
would, of course, lead to its being comparatively 
little known among the people attending those 

Many critics are inclined to regard the 
^ Gospel by Luke and the Acts of the Apostles as 
having formed originally only one work, con- 
sisting of two parts. For this opinion, however, 
there does nor appear to be any satisfactory au- 
thority ; and it is hardly accordant with Luke's 
own description of the relation of these two wri- 
tings to eacli other ; being called by him, the one 
the former and the other the latter treatise (\6yos), 
a term which would not oe appropriate had he 
intended to designate oy it the first and second 
parts of the savxe treatise. It would be difficult, 
also,xm this hypothesis to account for the two, 
invariably and from the earliest times, appearing 
with distinct titles. 

Of the greater part of the events recorded in 
. the Acts the writer himself appears to have been 
witness. He is for the first time introduced into 
the narrative in ch. xvi. 11. where he speaks of ac- 
companying Paul to Philippi. He then clisap- 



pears from the narrative until Paul's icturn to 
Philippi, more than two years afterwards, when 
it is stated that they left that place in company 
(xx. 6); from which it may be justly inferred that 
Luke spent the interval in that town. From this 
time to the close of the period embraced by his 
narrative he appears as the companion of the 
apostle. For the materials, therefore, of all he 
has recorded from ch. xvi. 11, to xxviii. 31, he may 
be regarded as having drawn upon his own recol- 
lection or on that of the apostle. To the latter 
source, also,. -may be confidently traced all lie 
has recorded concerning the earlier events of the 
apostle's career ; and as respects the circum- 
stances recorded in the first twelve chapters of 
the Acts, and which relate chiefly to the church 
at Jerusalem and the labours of the apostle Peter, 
we may readily suppose that they were so much 
matter of general notoriety among the Christians 
with whom Luke associated, that he needed no 
assistance from any other merely human source 
in recording them. Some of the German critics 
have laboured hard to show that he must have had 
recourse to written documents, in order to com- 
pose those parts of his history which record what 
did not pass under his own observation, and they 
have gone the length of supposing the existence of 
a work in the language of Palestine, under the 
title of KB^H H3J/0 or KDnSK, of which 
the Apooyphal book Ylpa^eis Tllrpov or Kr/pvyjua 
Tierpov, mentioned by Clement of Alexandria 
and Origen, was an interpolated edition (Hein- ' 
richs, Prolegg. in Acta App. p. 21 ; Kuinoel, 
Proleg. p. 14). All this, however, is mere un- 
grounded supposition.* There is not the shadow 
of evidence that any written documents were 
extant from which Luke could have drawn his 
materials, and with regard to the alleged impos- 
sibility of his learning from traditionary report 
the minute particulars he has recorded (which is 
what these critics chiefly insist on), it is to be 
remembered that, in common with all the sacred 
writers, he enjoyed the superintending and in- 
spiring influence of the Divine Spirit, whose office 
it was to preserve him from all error and to guide 
him into all truth. 

A more important inquiry respects the de- 
sign of the evangelist in writing this book. A 
prevalent popular opinion on tliis head is, that 
Luke, having in his Gospel given a history of the 
life of Christ, intended to follow that up by giving 
in the Acts a narrative of the establishment and 
early progress of his religion in the world. That 
this, however, could not have been his design is 
obvious from the very partial and limited view 
which his narrative' gives of the state of things in 

* This is admitted by Heinrichs : ' Quot enim 
et qualia fuerint ilia monumenta, quo idiomate 
consignata, num^ Syriaco, Aramaeo, an Gra?co, 
quo titulo vulgata, quotusque a Luca excerpta, 
&c. de his qui clem non certissime, sed ex con- 
jecturarum tantummodo umbris poterit disquiri ' 
(Heinrichs, I. c. p. 21). Of documents whose 
names, nature, language, as well as the extent to 
which the}' were used by a writer who is said to 
have been indebted for his materials to them, can. 
be gathered only out of the ' shadowy regions of 
conjecture,' one would think no mind that is ac- 
customed to weigh evidence would think it worth 
while to take any notice. 




the church generally during the period through 
which it extends. As little can we regard this 
hook as designed to record the official history of 
the apostles Peter and Paul, for we find many 
particulars concerning both these apostles men- 
tioned incidentally elsewhere, of which Luke 
takes no notice (comp. 2 Cor. xi. ; Gal. i. 17 ; 
ii. 11 ; 1 Pet. v. 13. See also Michaelis, Intro- 
duction, vol. iii. p. 328. Haenlein's Einleitung, 
th. iii. s. 150). Heinrichs, Kuinoel, and others 
are of opinion that no particular design should be 
ascribed to the evangelist in composing this book 
beyond that of furnishing his friend Theophilus 
with a pleasing and instructive narrative of such 
events as had come under his own personal notice, 
either immediately through the testimony of his 
senses or through the medium of the reports of 
others ; but such a view savours too much of the 
lax opinions which these writers unhappily enter- 
tamed regarding the sacred writers, to be adopted 
by those who regard all the sacred books as de- 
signed for the permanent instruction and benefit 
of the church universal. Much more deserv- 
ing of notice is the opinion of Haenlein, with 
which that of Michaelis substantially accords, 
that ' the general design of the author of this book 
was, by means of his narratives, to set forth the 
co-operation of God in the diffusion of Christi- 
anity, and along with that, to prove, by remark- 
able facts, the dignity of the apostles and the 
perfectly equal right of the Gentiles with the 
Jews to a participation in the blessings of that 
religion ' {Einleitung, th. iii. s. 156. Comp. 
Michaelis, Introduction, vol. iii. p. 330). Perhaps 
we should come still closer to the truth if we 
were to say that the design of Luke in writing 
the Acts was to supply, by select and suitable 
instances, an illustration of the power and 
working of that religion which Jesus had died 
to establish. In his gospel he had presented 
to his readers an exhibition of Christianity as 
embodied in the person, character, and works of 
its great founder; and having followed him in 
his narration until he was taken up out of the 
sight of his disciples into heaven, this second work 
was written to show how his religion operated 
when committed to the hands of those by whom 
it was to be announced 'to all nations, beginning 
at Jerusalem ' (Luke xxiv. 47). In this point of 
view the recitals in this book present a theme that 
is practically interesting to Christians in all ages 
of the church and all places of the world ; for 
they exhibit to us what influences guided the 
actions of those who laid the foundations of the 
church, and to whose authority all its members 
must defer — what courses they adopted for the 
extension of the church, — what ordinances they 
appointed to be observed by those Christians who, 
under their auspices, associated together for 
mutual edification, — and what difficulties, pri- 
vations, and trials were to be expected by those 
who should zealously exert themselves for the 
triumph of Christianity. We are thus taught not 
by dogmatical statement, but by instructive nar- 
rative, under what sanctions Christianity appears 
in our world, what blessings she oilers to men, 
and by what means her influence is most ex- 
tensively to be promoted and the blessings she 
offers to be most widely and most fully enjoyed. 

Respecting the time when this book was com- 
posed it is impossible to speak with certainty. 


As the history is continued up to the close of the 
second year of Paul's imprisonment at Rome, it 
could not have been written before a.d. 63 ; it 
was probably, however, composed very soon after, 
so that we shall not err far if we assign the in- 
terval between the year 63 and the year 65 as the 
period of its completion. Still greater uncertainty 
hangs over the place where Luke composed it, but 
as he accompanied Paul to Rome, perhaps it was 
at that city and under the auspices of the apostle 
that it was prepared. 

The style of Luke in the Acts is, like his 
style in his Gospel, much purer than that of most 
other books of the New Testament. The He- 
braisms which occasionally occur are almost 
exclusively to be found in the speeches of others 
which he has reported. These speeches are in- 
deed, for the most part, to be regarded rather as 
summaries than as full reports of what the speaker 
uttered ; but as these summaries are given in the 
speakers' own words, the appearance of Hebraisms 
in them is as easily accounted for as if the ad- 
dresses had been reported in full. His mode of 
narrating events is clear, dignified, and lively ; 
and, as Michaelis observes, he ' has well supported 
the character of each person whom he 'has intro- 
duced as delivering a public harangue, and has 
very faithfully and happily preserved the manner 
of speaking which was peculiar to each of his 
orators ' (Introduction, vol. iii. p. 332). 

Whilst, as Lardner and others have very satis- 
factorily shown (Lardner's Credibility, Works, 
vol. i. ; Biscoe, On the Acts ; Paley's Horce'Pau- 
litice ; Benson's History of the First Planting of 
Christianity, vol. ii. &c), the credibility of the 
events recorded by Luke is fully authenticated both 
by internal and external evidence, very great ob- 
scurity attaches to the chronology of these events. 
Of the many conflicting systems which have been 
published for the purpose of settling the questions 
that have arisen on this head, it is impossible 
within such limits as those to which this article is 
necessarily confined, to give any minute account. 
As little do we feel ourselves at liberty to attempt 
an original investigation of the subject, even did 
such promise to be productive ot any very satis- 
factory result. The only course that appears 
open to us is to present, in a tabular form, the 
dates affixed to the leading events by those writers 
whose authority is most deserving of consideration 
in such an inquiry.— (See next page!) 

The majority of these dates can only be regarded 
as approximations to the truth, and the diversity 
which the above table presents shows the uncer- 
tainty of the whole matter. The results at which 
Mr. Greswell and Dr. Anger have arrived are, in 
many cases, identical, and upon the whole the 
earlier date which they assign to the ascension of 
Christ seems worthy of adoption. We cannot 
help thinking, however, that the interval assigned 
by these writers to the events which transpired be- 
tween the ascension of Christ and tEe "'stoning of 
Stephen is much too great. The date which they 
assign to Paul's first visit to Jerusalem is also 
plainly too late, for Paul himself tells us that his 
flight from Damascus occurred whilst that town 
was under the authority of Aretas, whose tenure 
of it cannot be extended beyond the year 38 of the 
common sera (2 Cor. xi. 32. See also Neander's 
remarks on these in Geschichte der Pflanzung 
und Leitung der Christlichen Kirche, Bd. i. 




The Ascension of Christ 

Stoning of Stephen 

Conversion of Paul 

Paul's first journey to Jerusalem (Acts ix. 26) 

James's Martyrdom, &c 

Paul's second journey to Jerusalem (Acts 

xi. 12) 

Paul's first missionary tour 

Paul's third journey to Jerusalem (Acts xv.) 

Paul arrives at Corinth 

Paul's fourth journey to Jerusalem (Acts 

xviii. 22) 

Paul's abode at Ephesus 

Paul's fifth journey to Jerusalem (Acts 

xxi. 17) 

Paul arrives in Rome 
















































— , 













































s. 80). Perhaps the following is the true order 
of the events of the apostle's early career as 
a Christian. In Gal. ii. 1, he speaks himself 
of going up to Jerusalem fourteen years, or about 
fourteen years, after his conversion (for so we un- 
derstand his words). Now this visit could not 
have been that recorded in Acts xv., because we 
cannot conceive that after the events detailed in 
that chapter Peter would have acted as Paul 
describes in Gal. ii. 11. We conclude, therefore, 
that the visit here referred to was one earlier than 
that mentioned in Acts xv. It must, therefore, 
have been that mentioned in Acts xi. 12. Now, 
this being at the time of the famine, its 'date is 
pretty well fixed to the year 45, or thereabouts. 
Subtract 14 from this, then, and we get 31 as the 
date of Paul's conversion, and adding to this the 
three years that elapsed between his conversion and 
his first visit to Jerusalem (Gal. i. 18), we get the 
year 34 as the date of this latter event. If this 
arrangement be not adopted, the visit to Jerusalem 
mentioned in Gal. ii. 1, must, for the reason just 
mentioned, be intercalated between the commence- 
ment of Paul's first missionary tour and his visit 
to Jerusalem at the time of the holding of the so- 
called council ; so that the number of Paul's 
visits to that city would be six, instead of Jive. 
Schrader adopts somewhat of a similar view, only 
he places this additional visit between the fourth 
and fifth of those mentioned in the Acts (Dcr 
Apostel Paulus, 4 Th. Leipz. 1830-1838). 

9.. Of separate commentaries on the Acts of 
the Apostles the most, valuable are the following : 
Limborch, Commentarium in Acta Ap>ostolorum, 
&c. fol., Roterodami, 1711; J. E. M. Walch, 

1 Annates. Folio. Bremae, 16S6, p. 611. 

2 Annates Paulini. Opp. Posthuma. 4to. 
Lend. 1GSS. 

3 Introduction to the New Testament, vol. iii. 
p. 336. 

4 Einleitung, 3te Auflage, Bd. ii. s. 307. 

5 Einleitung, 2te Aufi. Bd. iii. s. 157. 

6 Dissertations, &c. 5 vols. Svo. Oxf. 1837. 

7 De Temporum in Actis App. Rati one. Svo. 
Lips. 1833. 

Dissertt. in Acta App. 3 torn. 4to. Jena, 1756 
1761 ; Sam. F. N. Moras, Versio et Explicatio 
Act. App. ed. Dindorf, 2 torn. 8 to. Leips. 1794 ; 
Richard Biscoe's History of the Acts, confirmed 
from other authors, &c. 8vo. Oxford, 1 829 ; 
Kuinoel, Comment, in Acta App>. which forms 
the fourth vol. of his Comment, in Libros Hist. 
N. T. Leips. 1818; Heinrichs, Acta Ap>p. per-' 
petua Annott. illustrata, being the third vol. 
of the Nov. Test. Koppianum. The works of 
Benson on the Planting of the Christian Churches, 
3 vols. 4to. ; and of Neander, Geschichte cler 
Leitung unci Pflanzung der Christlichen Kirchc 
durch die Apostel (recently translated into Eng- 
lish as part of the Edinburgh Biblical Cabinet), 
may be also viewed in the light of Commentaries 
on the Acts. — W. L. A. 

ACTS, SPURIOUS [Apocrypha]. This 
term has been applied to several ancient writings 
pretended to have been composed by, or to supply 
historical facts respecting our Blessed Saviour 
and his disciples, or other individuals whose ac- 
tions are recorded in the holy Scriptures. Of 
these spurious or pseudepigraphal writings several 
are still extant ; others are only known to have 
existed, by the accounts of them which are to be 
met with in ancient authors. 

Acts ov Christ, Spurious. Several sayings 
attributed to our Lord, and alleged to be banded 
down by tradition, may be included under this 
head, as they are supposed by some learned men 
to have been derived from histories which are no 
longer in existence. As explanatory of our 
meaning it will suffice to refer to the beautiful 
sentiment cited by St. Paul (Acts xx. 35), 
Ma.Kd.pi6i/ iffTi jxaWov 5iS6uai t) Aa/x/3a;etj', to 
which the term apocryphal has been sometimes 
applied, inasmuch as it is not contained in any 
of the written biographies of our Lord. This 
term is so applied by M. Gaussen of Geneva, in 
his Theopneustia (English translation, Ba . 
1842). The learned Heinsius is of Opinion that 
the passage is taken from some lost apocryphal 
book, such as that entitled, in the Recognitions 
of Clement, ' the Book of the Sayings of '. 
or the pretended Oonstittftions of the Apostles. 



Others, however, conceive that the apostle, . in 
Acts xx. 35, does not refer to any one saying of 
our Saviour's in particular, but that he deduced 
Christ's sentiments on this head from several of 
his sayings and parables (see Matt. xix. 21; xxv. ; 
and Luke xvi. 9). But the probability is that 
St. Paul received this passage by tradition from 
the other apostle3. 

There is also a saying ascribed to Christ to be 
found in the Epistle of Barnabas, a work at 
least of the second century : ' Let us resist all 
iniquity, and hate it ;' and again, ' So they who 
would see me, and lay hold on my kingdom, 
must receive me through much suffering and tri- 
bulation :' but it is not improbable that these 
passages contain merely an allusion to some of 
our Lord's discourses. 

Clemens Romanus, the third bishop of Rome 
after St. Peter (or the writer who passes under 
the name of Clement), in his Second Epistle to 
the Corinthians, ascribes the following saying 
to Christ : — ' Though ye should be united to me 
in my bosom, and yet do not keep my com- 
mandments, I will reject you, and say, Depart 
from me, I know not whence ye are, ye workers 
of iniquity.' This passage seems evidently to be 
taken from St. Luke's gospel, xiii. 25, 26, 27. 

There are many similar passages, which several 
eminent writers, such as Grabe, Mill, and Fabri- 
cius, have considered as derived from apocryphal 
gospels, but which seem with greater probability 
to be nothing more than loose quotations from 
the Scriptures, which were very, common among 
the apostolical Fathers. 

There is a saying of Christ's, cited by Clement 
in the same epistle, which is found in the apocry- 
phal gospel of the Egyptians : — ' The Lord, being 
asked when his kingdom should come, replied, 
When tioo shall be one, and that which is loith- 
out as that tvhich is within, and the male with 
the female neither male nor female ' [Gospels, 

We may here mention that the genuineness of 
the Second Epistle of Clement is itself disputed, 
and is rejected by Eusebius, Jerome, and others ; 
at least Eusebius says of it, ' We know not that 
this is as highly approved of as the former, or 
that it has been in use with the ancients ' (Hist. 
Eccles. iii. 38, Cruse's translation, 1842). 

Eusebius, in the last chapter of the same book, 
states that Papias, a companion of the apostles, 
' gives another history of a woman who had been 
accused of many sins before the Lord, which is 
also contained in the Gospel according to the 
Nazarenes.' As this latter work is lost, it is 
doubtful to what woman the history refers. Some 
suppose it alludes to the history of the woman 
taken in adultery ; others, to the woman of Sa- 
maria. There are two discourses ascribed to 
Christ by Papias, preserved in Irenseus (Adversics 
Hares, v. 33), relating to the doctrine of the 
Millennium, of which Papias appears to have 
been the first propagator. Dr. Grabe has de- 
fended the truth of these traditions, but the dis- 
courses themselves are unworthy of our blessed 

There is a saying ascribed to Christ by Justin 
Martyr, in his Dialogue with Trtjpho, which has 
been supposed by Dr. Cave to have been taken 
from the Gospel of the Nazarenes. Mr. Jones 
conceives it to have been an allusion to a passage 


in the prophet Ezekiel. The same Father fur- 
nishes us with an apocryphal history of Christ's 
baptism, in which it is asserted that ' a fire wa3 
kindled in Jordan.' He also acquaints us that 
Christ worked, when he was on earth, at the trade 
of a carpenter, making ploughs and yokes for 

There are some apocryphal sayings of Christ 
preserved by Irenaeus, but his most remarkable 
observation is, that Christ ( lived and taught be- 
yond his fortieth, or even fiftieth year.' This h«; 
founds partly on absurd inferences drawn frorr 
the character of his mission, partly on John viv> 
57, and also on what he alleges to have beer 
John's own testimony, delivered to the presbyter 
of Asia. It is scarcely necessary to refute this 
absurd idea, which is in contradiction with all 
the statements in the genuine gospels. There is 
also an absurd saying attribute to Christ by 
Athenagoras, Legat. pro Christ* -nis, cap. 28. 

There are various sayings aj.'ibed to our Lord 
by Clemens Alexandrinus r-»*4 several of the 
Fathers. One of the most remarkable is, ' Be ye 
skilful money-changers.' This is supposed to 
have been contained in the Gospel of the Naza- 
renes. Others think it to ha"*> been an early in- 
terpolation into the text of Scripture. Origen 
and Jerome cite it as a sayi* 4 of Christ's. 

In Origen, Contra Celsun lib. i., is an apocry- 
phal history of our Savioui nd his parents, in 
which it is reproached to CI t that he was bom 
in a mean village, of a jwoi woman who gained 
her livelihood by spinning, and was turned off by 
her husband, a carpenter. Celsus adds that Jesus 
was obliged by poverty to work as a servant in 
Egypt, where he learned many powerful arts, and 
thought that on this account he ought to be 
esteemed as a god. There was a similar account 
contained in some apocryphal books extant in the 
time of St. Augustine. It was probably a Jewish 
forgery. Augustine, Epiphanius, and others of the 
Fathers equally cite sayings and acts of Christ, 
which they probably met with in the early apo- 
cryphal gospels. 

There is a spurious hymn of Christ's extant, 
ascribed to the Priscillianists by St. Augustine. 
There are also many such acts and sayings to be 
found in the Koran of Mahomet, and others in 
the writings of the Mohammedan doctors (see 
Toland's Nazarenus). 

There is a prayer ascribed to our Saviour by 
the same persons, which is printed in Latin 
and Arabic in the learned Selden's Commentary 
on Eutychiuss Annals of Alexandria, published 
at Oxford, in 1650, by Dr. Pococke. It contains 
a petition for pardon of sin, which is sufficient to 
stamp it as a forgery. 

We must not omit to mention here the two 
curious acts of Christ recorded, the one by Eu- 
sebius, and the other by Evagrius. The first of 
these included a letter said to have been written 
to our Saviour by Agbarus (or Abgarus), king of 
Edessa, requesting him to come and heal a dis- 
ease under which he laboured. The letter, to- 
gether with the supposed reply of Christ, are pre- 
served by Eusebius. This learned historian asserts 
that he obtained the documents, together with the 
history, from the public registers of the city of 
Edessa, where they existed in his time in the 
Syriac language, from which he translated them 
into Greek. 


These letters are also mentioned by Ephraim 
Syrus, deacon of Edessa, at the close of the fourth 
century. Jerome refers to them in his comment on 
Matt, x., and they are mentioned by Pope Gelasius, 
who rejects them as spurious and apocryphal. They 
are, however, referred to as genuine by Evagrius 
and later historians. Among modern writers the 
genuineness of these letters has been maintained 
by Dr. Parker, in the preface to his Demonstra- 
tion of the Laio of Nature, and the Christian 
Beligion, part ii. § 16, p. 23$ ; by Dr. Cave, 
in his Historia Literaria, vol. i. p. 23 ; and 
by Grote, in his Spicilegium Patrum, particularly 
p. 319. On the other hand, most writers, in- 
cluding the great majority of Roman Catholic 
divines, reject them as spurious. Mr. Jones, in 
his valuable work on the Canonical Authority of 
the New Testament, although he does not venture 
to deny that the Acts were contained in the public 
registers of the city of Edessa, yet gives it, as a 
probable conjecture, in favour of which he adduces 
some strong reasons, drawn from internal evi- 
dence, that this whole chapter (viz. the 13th 
of the first book) in the Ecclesiastical History of 
Eusebius is itself an interpolation. But the let- 
ters will speak for themselves : — 
Copy of a Letter loritten by King Agbarus to 
Jesus, and sent to him at Jerusalem, by Ana- 
nias, the courier. 

'Agbarus, prince of Edessa, sends greeting, to 
Jesus, the excellent Saviour, who has appeared in 
the borders of Jerusalem. I have heard the re- 
ports respecting thee and thy cures, as performed 
by thee without medicines and without the use of 
herbs. For, as it is said, thou causest the blind 
to see again, the lame to walk, and thou cleansest 
the lepers, and thou castest out impure spirits and 
demons, and thou healest those who are tormented 
by long disease, and thou raisest the dead. And 
hearing all these things of thee, I concluded in 
my mind one of two things: either, that thou art 
God, and having descended from heaven, doest 
these things ; or else, doing them, thou art the Son 
of God. Therefore, now I have written, and be- 
sought thee to visit me, and to heal the disease 
with which I am afflicted. I have also heard 
that the Jews murmur against thee, and are plot- 
ting to injure thee; I have, however, a very small 
but noble estate, which is sufficient for us both.' 
The Answer of Jesus to King Agbarus, by the 

courier Ananias. 
'Blessed art thou. O Agbarus, who, without, 
seeing, hast believed in me. For it is written 
concerning me, that they who have seen will not 
believe, that they who have not seen may believe, 
and live. But in regard to what thou hast 
written, that I should come to thee, it is neces- 
sary that I should fulfil all things here, for which 
I am sent, and after their fulfilment, then to be 
received again by him that sent me ; and after I 
have been received up, I will send to thee a 
certain one of my disciples, that he may heal thy 
affliction, and give life to thee and those who are 
with thee' [ Spurious]. 

The other apocryphal history related by Eva- 
grius, out of Procopius, states that Agbarus sent a 
limner to draw the picture of our Saviour, but 
that not being able to do it by reason of the bright- 
ness of Christ's countenance, our Saviour 'took a 
cloth, and laying it upon his divine and life- 
giving face, he impressed his likeness on it.' This 


story of Christ's picture is related by several, in 
the Second Council of Nice, and by other ancient 
writers, one of whom (Leo) asserts that he went to 
Edessa, and saw 'the image of Christ, not made 
with hands, worshipped by the people.' This is 
the first of the four likenesses of Christ mentioned 
by ancient writers. The second is that said to 
have been stamped on a handkerchief by Christ, 
and given to Veronica, who had followed him to 
his crucifixion. The third is the statue of Christ, 
stated by Eusebius to have been erected by the 
woman whom he had cured of an issue of blood, 
and which the learned historian acquaints us 
he saw at Caesarea Philippi (Eusebius, Hist. 
Eccles. vii. 18). Sozomen and Cassiodorus assert 
that the emperor Julian took down this statue 
and erected his own in its place. It is, how- 
ever, stated by Asterius, a writer of the fourth 
century, that it was taken away by Maximinus, 
the predecessor of Constantine. The fourth pic- 
ture is one which Nicodemus presented to Ga- 
maliel, which was preserved at Berytus, and which 
having been crucified and pierced with a spear by 
the Jews, there issued out from the side blood and 
water. This is stated in a spurious treatise con- 
cerning the passion and image of Christ, falsely 
ascribed to Athanasius. Eusebius the historian 
asserts (Jog. cit.) that he had here seen the pictures 
of Peter, Paul, and of Christ himself, in his time 
(see also Sozomen, Hist. Eccles. v. 21). 

Acts of the Apostles, Spurious. 

Of these several are extant, others are lost, or 
only fragments of them are come down to us. 

Of the following we know little more than that 
they once existed. They are here arranged chro- 
nologically : — The Preaching of Peter, referred 
to by Origen, in his Commentary on St. John's 
Gospel, lib. xiv. ; also referred to by Clemens 
Alexandrinus. — The Acts of Peter, supposed by 
Dr. Cave to be cited by Serapion. — The Acts of 
Paid and Thecla, mentioned by Tertullian, Lib. 
de Baptismo, cap. xvii. : this is, however, sup- 
posed by some to be the same which is found in 
a Greek MS. in the Bodleian Library, and has 
been published by Dr. Grabe, in his Spied. Pa- 
trum Send. I. — The Doctrine of Peter, cited by 
Origen, ' Prooem.' in Lib. de Princip. — The Acts 
of Paul, ib. de Princip. i. 2. — The Preaching of 
Paid, referred to by St. Cyprian, Tract, de non 
iterando Baptismo. — The Preaching of Paul and 
Peter at Borne, cited by Lactantius, De vera Sap. i 
iv. 21. — The Acts of Peter, thrice mentioned by 
Eusebius, Hist. Eccles. iii. 3 : 'as to that work, 
however, which is ascribed to him, called "The 
Acts" and the "Gospel according to Peter," we 
know nothing of their being handed down as Ca- 
tholic writings, since neither among the ancient 
nor the ecclesiastical writers of our own day has 
there been one that has appealed to testimony 
taken from them.' — The Acts of Paul, ib. — 
The Bet-elation of Peter, ib. — The Acts of 
'Andrew and John, ib. cap. 25. Thus,' he 
says, ' we have it in our power to know . . . 
those books that are adduced by the heretics, 
under the name of the apostles, such, viz. as com- 
pose the gospels of Peter, Thomas, and Matthew, 
.... and such as contain the Acts of the Apostles 
by Andrew and John, and others of which no one 
of those writers in the ecclesiastical succession 
has condescended to make any mention in his 
works; and, indeed, the character of the style it- 




self is very different from that of the apostles, and 
the sentiments and the purport of those things that 
are advanced in them, deviating as far as possible 
from sound orthodoxy, evidently proves they are 
the fictions of heretical men; whence they are to 
be ranked not only among the spurious writings, 
but are to be rejected as altogether absurd and 
impious.' — The Acts of Peter, John, and Thomas. 
Athanasius, Synops. § 76. — The Writings of Bar- 
tholomew) the Apostle, mentioned by the pseudo- 
Dion ysius. — The Acts, Preaching, and Revelation 
of Peter, cited by Jerome, in his Catal. Script. 
Eccles. — The Acts of the Apostles by Seleucus, 
ib. Epist. ad Chrom., &c. — The Acts of Paul and 
Thecla, ib. Catalog. Script. Eccles. — The Acts of 
the Apostles, used by the Ebioniies, cited by 
Epiphanius, Adversus Hceres. § 16. — The Acts of 
Leucius, Lentius, or Lenticius, called the Acts 
of the Apostles, Augustin. Lib. cle Fid. c. 38. — 
The Acts of the Apostles, used by the Manichees. 
— The Revelations of Thomas, Paul, Stephen, 
&c. Gelasius, de Lib. Apoc. apud Gratian. Dis- 
tinct. 15. c. 3. 

To these may be added the genuine Acts of 
Pilate, appealed to by Tertullian and Justin 
Martyr, in their Apologies, as being then extant. 
Tertullian describes them as 'the records which 
were transmitted from Jerusalem to Tiberius 
concerning Christ.' He refers to the same for 
the proof of our Saviour's miracles. 

The following is a catalogue of the principal 
spurious Acts still extant: — The Creed of the 
Apostles. — The Epistles of Barnabas, Clement, 
Ignatius, and Polycarp. — The Recognitions of 
Clement, or the Travels of Peter. — The Shep- 
herd of Hernias. — The Acts of Pilate (spurious), 
or the Gos2iel of Nicodemus. — The Acts of 
Paul, or the Martyrdom of Thecla. — Abdias's 
History of the Twelve Apostles. — The Consti- 
tutions of the Apostles. — The Canons of the 
Apostles. — The Liturgies of the Apostles. — St. 
PauTs Epistle to the Laodiceans. — St. PauVs 
Letters to Seneca. Together with some others, 
for which see Cotelerius's Ecclesice Grcecae Mo- 
numenta, Paris, 1677-92; Fabricius, Codex Apo- 
cryphus, N. T. ; Du Pin, History of the Ca- 
non of the New Testament, London, 1699; 
Grabe's Spicilegium Patrum, Oxford, 1714; 
Lardner's Credibility, &c. ; Jones's Neio and Just 
Method of Settling the Canonical Authority of 
'theNeiv Testament; Birell's Tuctariuni, Hafeiae, 
1804 ; Thilo's Acta St. Thomce, Lips. 1823, and 
Codex Apocryphus N. T., Lips. 1S32.— W. W. 

ADAD is the name of the chief deity of the 
Syrians, the sun, according to Macrobius, whose 
words are (Saturnal. i. 23) : ' Accipe quid 
Assyrii de Solis potentia opinentur; deo enim, 
quern summum maximumque venerantur, Adad 
nomen dederunt. Ejus nominis interpretatio 

significat unus Simulacrum, Adad in- 

signe cernitur radiis inclinatis, quibus monstratur 
vim cceli in radiis esse Solis, qui demittuntur in 
terram.' Moreover, Pliny (Hist. Nat. xxxvii. 11, 
71), speaking of remarkable stones named after 
parts of the body, mentions some called ' Ada- 
dunephros, ejusdem oculus ac digitus dei ;' and 
adds, ' et hie coiilur a SjTis.' He is also called 
"AScoScy flao-iAevs QeSiv by Philo Byblius (in 
Eusebii Prcepar. Evan. i. 10), where the occur- 
rence of the long o for a is to be ascribed to the 
• characteristic pronunciation of the Western Ara- 

maean dialect. The passage of Hesychius whicfo 
Harduin adduces in his note to Pliny, concern- 
ing the worship of this god by the Phrygians, 
only contains the name "AScodos by an emenda- 
tion of Salmasius, which Jablonski declares to be 
inadmissible (De Ling. Lycaonica, p. 64). 

This Syrian deity claims some notice here, be- 
cause his name is most probably an element in 
the names of the Syrian kings Benhadad and 
Hadadezer. Moreover, several of the older com- 
mentators have endeavoured to find this deity in 
Isaiah lxvi. 17 ; either by altering the text there 
to suit the name given by Macrobius ; or by 
adapting the name he gives to his hrterpretatiovt 
and to the reading of the Hebrew, so as to make 
that extract bear testimony to a god Achad. 
Michaelis has argued at some length against both 
these views : and the modern commentators, such 
as Gesenius, Hitzig, Bottcher (in Proben Attest. 
Schrifterkldr.), and Ewald, do not admit the 
name of any deity in that passage. — J. N. 

ADAD-RIMMON, properly Hadad-Rimmon 

(J1D"}"!"!!! ; Sept. podv, a garden of pomegra- 
nates), a city in the valley of Jezreel, where 
was fought the famous battle between King Jo- 
siah and Pharaoh-Necho (2 Kings xxiii. 29 ; 
Zech. xii. 11). Adad-rimmon was afterwards 
called Maximianopolis, in honour of the emperor 
Maximian (Jerome, Comment, in Zach. xii.). 
It was seventeen Roman miles from Ceesarea, and 
ten miles from Jezreel (Itin. Hieros.). 

ADAH (rn>J, adornment, comeliness; Sept. 
'A5a): 1. one of the wives of Lamech (Gen. iv. 
19). 2. one of the wives of Esau, daughter of 
Elon the Hittite (Gen. xxxvi. 4). She is called 
Judith in Gen. xxvi. 34. 

ADAM (D^K), the word by which the Bible 

designates the first human being. 

It is evident that, in the earliest use of lan- 
guage, the vocal sound employed to designate the 
first perceived object, of any kind, would be an 
appellative, and would be formed from something 
known or apprehended to be a characteristic pro- 
perty of that object. The word would, therefore, 
be at once the appellative and the proper name. 
But when other objects of the same kind were dis- 
covered, or subsequently came into existence, dif- 
ficulty would be felt; it would become necessary 
to guard against confusion, and the inventive 
•faculty would be called upon to obtain a discri- 
minative term for each and singular individual, 
while some equally appropriate term would be 
fixed upon for the whole kind. Different me- 
thods of effecting these two purposes might be 
resorted to, but the most natural would be to 
retain the original term in its simple state, for the 
first individual: and to make some modification 
of it by prefixing another sound, or by subjoining 
one, or by altering the vowel or vowels in the body 
of the word, in order to have a term for the kind, 
and for the separate individuals of the land. 

This reasoning is exemplified in the first appli- 
cations of the word before us : (Gen. i. 26), ' Let 
us make man [Adam] in our image;' (i. 27), 
' And God created the man [the Adam] in his 
own' image.' The next instance (ii. 7) expresses 
the source of derivation, a character or proj^erty, 
namely, the material of which the human body 
was formed : ' And the Lord God [Jehovah 


Elohim] formed the man [the Adam] dust from 
the ground [the adamah]'. The meaning of the 
primary word is, most probably, any kind of 
reddish tint, as a beautiful human complexion 
(Lam. iv. 7) ; but its various derivatives are 
applied to different objects of a red or brown hue, 
or approaching to such. The word Adam, there- 
fore, is an appellative noun made into a proper 
one. It is further remarkable that, in all the 
other instances in the second and third chapters 
of Genesis, which are nineteen, it is put with the 
article, the man, or the Adam. It is also to be 
observed that, though it occurs very frequently in 
the Old Testament, and though there is no gram- 
matical difficulty in the way of its being declined 
by the dual and plural terminations and the pro- 
nominal suffixes (as its derivative Dl, dam, 
blood, is), yet it never undergoes those changes ; 
it is used abundantly to denote man in the gene- 
ral and collective sense — mankind, the human 
race, but it is never found in the plural num- 
ber. When the sacred writers design to express 
men distributively, they use either the compound 
term, sons of men (plit, ^2, lenei adani), or 
the plural of &>1JX enosh, or Wit ish. 

The question arises, Was the uttered sound, 
originally employed for this purpose, the very 
vocable Adam, or was it some other sound of cor- 
respondent signification? This is equivalent to 
asking, what was the primitive language of men? 

That language originated in the instinctive 
cries of human beings herding together in a con- 
dition like that of common animals, is an hypo- 
thesis which, apart from all testimony of revela- 
tion, must appear unreasonable to a man of seri- 
ous reflection. There are other animals, besides 
man, whose organs are capable of producing arti- 
culate sounds, through a considerable range of 
variety, and distinctly pronounced. How, then, 
is it that parrots, jays, and starlings have not 
among themselves developed an articulate lan- 
guage, transmitted it to their successive genera- 
tions, and improved it, both in the life-time of 
the individual and in the series of many gene- 
rations ? Those birds never attempt to speak 
till they are compelled by a difficult process on 
the jrart of their trainers, and they never train 
each other. 

Upon the mere ground of reasoning from the 
necessity of the case, it seems an inevitable con- 
clusion that not the capacity merely, but the 
actual use of speech, with the corresponding fa- 
culty of promptly understanding it, was given to 
the first human beings by a superior power : and 
it would be a gratuitous absurdity to suppose that 
power to be any other than the Almighty Creator. 
In what manner such communication or infusion 
of what would be equivalent to a habit took 
place, it is in vain to inquire ; the subject lies 
beyond the range of human investigation : but, 
from the evident exigency, it must have been in- 
stantaneous, or nearly so. It is not necessary to 
suppose that a copious language was thus be- 
stowed upon the human creatures in the first stage 
of their existence. We need to suppose only so 
much as would be requisite for the notation of the 
ideas of natural wants and the most important 
mental conceptions ; and from these, as germs, 
the powers of the mind and the faculty of vocal 
designation would educe new words and combina- 
tiuns as occasion demanded 



That the language thus formed continued to be 
the universal speech of mankind till after the 
deluge, and till the great cause of diversity 
[Language] took place, is in itself the most 
probable supposition. If there were any fami- 
lies of men which were not involved in the 
crime of the Babel-builders, they would almost 
certainly retain the primeval language. The 
longevity of the men of that period would be a 
powerful conservative of that language aj«ainst 
the slow changes of time. That there were" such 
exceptions seems to be almost an indubitable in- 
ference from the fact that Noah long survived the 
unholy attempt. His faithful piety would not 
have suffered him to fall into the snare ; and it is 
difficult to suppose that none of his children and 
descendants would listen to his admonitions, and 
hold fast their integrity by adhering to him : on 
the contrary, it is reasonable to suppose that the 
habit and character of piety were established in 
many of them. 

The confusion of tongues, therefore, whatever 
was the nature of that judicial visitation, would 
not fall upon that portion of men which was the 
most orderly, thoughtful, and pious, among whom 
the second father of mankind dwelt as their ac- 
knowledged and revered head. 

If this supposition be admitted, we can have no 
difficulty in regarding as the mother of languages, 
not indeed the Hebrew, absolutely speaking, but 
that which was the stock whence branched the 
Hebrew, and its sister tongues, usually called 'the 
Shemitic, but more properly, by Dr. Prichard, the 
Syro-Arabian. It may then be maintained that 
the actually spoken names of Adam and all the 
others mentioned in the ante-diluvian history were 
those which we have in the Hebrew Bible, very 
slightly and not at all essentially varied. 

On the other hand, some of the greatest names 
in the study and comparison of languages main- 
tain that ' the primeval language has not been 
anywhere preserved, but that fragments of it 
must, from the common origin of all, everywhere 
exist ; that these fragments will indicate the ori- 
ginal derivation and kindredship of all ; and 
that some direct causation of no common agency 
has operated to begin, and lias so permanently 
affected mankind as to establish, a striking and 
universally experienced diversity ' (Mr. Sharon 
Turner ' On the Languages of the World," &c, in 
the Transactions of the Royal Society of Lite- 
rature, the volumes published in 1827 and 1834). 
We take this citation from Dr. Bosworth's Anglo- 
Saxon Dictionary, Pref. p. iii., where that eminent 
scholar and antiquary seems tacitly to inlimate 
his concurrence with Mr. Turner, and subjoins, — 
' A gentleman, whose erudition is universally ac- 
knowledged, and whose ojiinion, from his exten- 
sive lingual knowledge and especially from his 
critical acquaintance with the Oriental tongues, 
deserves the greatest attention, has come to this 
conclusion ; for lie has stated, " The original lan- 
guage, of which the oldest daughter is the Sanskrit, 
the fruitful mother of so many dialects, exists no ■ 
longer" (Prof. Hamaker's Academische ]~vortc- 
zingen, Leyden, 1S35). 

Upon this hypothesis it will follow that a 
knowledge of the proper names of the iiisi human 
family, and of all down to the times of Abraham, 
is absolutely unattainable ; and that the Hebrew 
designations which we [Vssess are not echoes of the 



sounds, but representatives or translations of their 
signification. We acknowledge that the former 
seems to us the more probable opinion. 

That men and other animals have existed from 
eternity, by each individual being born of parents 
and dying at the close of his period, that is, by an 
infinite succession of finite beings, has been as- 
serted by some : whether they really believed their 
own assertion may well be doubted. Others have 
maintained that the first man and his female 
mate, or a number of such, came into existence 
by some spontaneous action of the earth or the 
elements, a chance-combination of matter and 
properties, without an intellectual designing cause. 
We hold these notions to be unworthy of a serious 
refutation. An upright mind, upon a little se- 
rious reflection, must perceive their absurdity, 
self-con tradiction, and impossibility. To those 
who may desire to see ample demonstration of 
what we here assert, we recommend Dr. Samuel 
Clarke On the Being and Attributes of God ; Mr. 
Samuel Drew's Essays; or an admirable work 
not known in a manner corresponding to its 
worth, Discourses on Atheism, by the Rev. Thomas 
Allin, 1S28. 

It is among the clearest deductions of reason, 
that men and all dependent beings have been 
created, that is, produced or brought into their 
first existence by an intelligent and adequately 
powerful being. A question, however, arises, of 
great interest and importance. Did the Almighty 
Creator produce only one man and one woman, 
from whom all other human beings have de- 
scended ? — or did he create several parental pairs, 
from whom distinct stocks of men have been de- 
rived ? The affirmative of the latter position has 
been maintained by some, and, it must be con- 
fessed, not without apparent reason. The mani- 
fest and great differences in complexion and 
figure, which distinguish several races of man- 
kind, are supposed to be such as entirely to forbid 
the conclusion that they have all descended from 
one father and one mother. The question is 
usually regarded as equivalent to this : whether 
there is only one species of men, or there are 
several. But we cannot, in strict fairness, admit 
that the questions are identical. It is hypotheti- 
cally conceivable that the Adorable God might 
give existence to any number of creatures, which 
should all possess the properties which charac- 
terize identity of species, even without such differ- 
ences as constitute varieties, or with any degree 
of those differences. A learned German divine, 
Dr. de Schrank, thinks it right to maintain that, 
of all organized beings besides man, the Creator 
gave existence to innumerable individuals, of 
course in their proper pairs {Comm. in Gen. p. 69, 
Sulzbach, 1835). His reason probably is, that 
otherwise there would not be a provision of food : 
but -whether the conjecture be admitted or not, it 
is plain that it involves no contradiction, and 
that therefore distinct races of men might have 
been created, differing within certain limits, yet 
all possessing that which physiologists lay down 
as the only proper and constant character, the 
perpetuity of propagation. 

But the admission of the possibility is not a 
concession of the reality. So great is the evidence 
in favour of the derivation of the entire mass of 
human beings from one pair of ancestors, that it 
has obtained the suffrage of the men most com- 


petent to judge upon a question of comparative 
anatomy and physiology. The late illustrious 
Cuvier and Blumenbach, and our countryman 
Mr. Lawrence, are examples of the highest order. 
But no writer has a claim to deference upon this 
subject superior to that of Dr. J. C. Prichard. He 
has devoted a large work, which is still in the 
progress of publication, to this subject and others 
allied to it — Researches into the Physical History 
of Mankind, 3 volumes, and one more at least 
to come, 1836-1841 : also another work, just 
completed — The Natural History of Man, 1842. 
In the Introductory Observations contained in 
the latter work we find a passage which we cite 
as an example of that noble impartiality ^and dis- 
regard of even sacred prepossessions with which 
the author has pursued his laborious investigation : 
' I shall not pretend that in my own mind I re- 
gard the question now to be discussed as one of 
which the decision is indifferent either to religion 
or to humanity. But the strict rule of scientific 
scrutiny exacts, according to modern philosophers, 
in matters of inductive reasoning, an exclusive 
homage. It requires that we should close our 
eyes against all presumptive and extrinsic evi- 
dence, and abstract our minds from all consider- 
ations not derived from the matters of fact which 
bear immediately on the question. The maxim 
we have to follow in such controversies is, fiat 
justitia, ruat coelum. In fact, what is actually 
true, it is always most desirable to know, what- 
ever consequences may arise from its admis- 

The animals which render eminent services to 
man, and peculiarly depend upon his protection, 
are widely diffused — the horse, the dog, the hog, 
the domestic fowl. Now of these the varieties in 
each species are numerous and different, to a de- 
gree so great, that an observer ignorant of phy- 
siological history would scarcely believe them to 
be of the same species. But man is the most 
widely diffused of any animal. In the progress 
of ages and generations, he has naturalized him- 
self to every climate, and to modes of life which 
would prove fatal to an individual man suddenly 
transferred from a remote point of the field. The 
alterations produced affect every part of the body, 
internal and external, without extinguishing the 
marks of the srjecific identity. A further and 
striking evidence is, that when persons of different 
varieties are conjugally united, the offspring, 
especially in two or three generations, becomes 
more prolific, and acquires a higher perfection in 
physical and mental qualities than was found in 
either of the parental races. From the deepest 
African black to the finest Caucasian white, the 
change runs through imperceptible gradations ; 
and, if a middle hue be assumed, suppose some 
tint of brown, all the varieties of complexion may 
be explained upon the principle of divergence in- 
fluenced by outward circumstances. The con- 
clusion may be fairly drawn, in the words of the 
able translators and illustrators of Baron Cuvier's 
great work : — ' We are fully warranted in con- 
cluding, both from the comparison of man with 
inferior animals, so far as the inferiority will 
allow of such comparison, and, beyond that, by 
comparing him with himself, that the great family 
of mankind loudly proclaim a descent, at some 
period or other, from one common origin.' {Ani- 
mal Kingdom, with the Supplements of Mr. E. 


Griffith, Col. Hamilton Smith, and Mr. Pidgeon. 
vol. i. p. 179). 

Tims, by an investigation totally independent 
of historical authority, we are brought to the con- 
clusion of the inspired writings, that the Creator 
' hath made of one blood all nations of men, for 
to dwell on all the face of the earth' (Acts 
xvii. 26). 

We shall now follow the course of those sacred 
documents in tracing the history of the first man, 
persuaded that their right interpretation is a sure 
basis of truth. At the same time we shall not 
reject illustrations from natural history and the 
reason of particular facts. 

It is evident upon a little reflection, and the 
closest investigation confirms the conclusion, that 
the first human pair must have been created in a 
state equivalent to that which all subsequent hu- 
man beings have had to reach by slow degrees, in 
growth, experience, observation, imitation, and 
the instruction of others : that is, a state of prime 
maturity, and with an infusion, concreation, or 
whatever we may call it, of knowledge and ha- 
bits, both physical and intellectual, suitable to 
the place which man had to occupy in the system 
of creation, and adequate to his necessities in that 
place. Had it been otherwise, the new beings 
could not have preserved their animal existence, 
nor have held rational converse with each other, 
nor have paid to their Creator the homage of know- 
ledge and love, adoration and obedience ; and 
reason clearly tells us that the last was the no- 
blest end of existence. Those whom unhappy 
prejudices lead to reject revelation must either 
admit this, or must resort to suppositions of pal- 
pable absurdity and impossibility. If they will 
not admit a direct action of Divine power in 
creation and adaptation to the designed mode of 
existence, they must admit something far beyond 
the miraculous, an infinite succession of finite 
beings, or a spontaneous production of order, orga- 
nization, and systematic action, from som».unin- 
telligent origin. The Bible coincides with this 
dictate of honest reason, expressing these facts in 
simple and artless language, suited to the cir- 
cumstances of the men to whom revelation was 
first granted. That this production in a mature 
state was the fact with regard to the vegetable 
part of the creation, is declared in Gen. ii. 4, 5 : 
' In the day of Jehovah God's making the earth 
and the heavens, and every shrub of the field 
before it should be in the earth, and every herb of 
the field before it should bud.' The reader sees 
that we have translated the verbs (which stand 
in the Hebrew future form) by our potential 
mood, as the nearest in correspondence with the 
idiom called by Dr. Nordheimer the ' Dependent 
Use of the Future ' (Critical Grammar of the 
Heb. La?ig., vol. ii. p. 166; New York, 1S41). 
The two terms, shrubs and herbage, are put, by 
the common synecdoche, to designate the whole 
vegetable kingdom. The reason of the case com- 
prehends the' other division of organized nature; 
and this is applied to man and all other ani- 
mals, in the words, ' Out of the ground — dust 
out of the ground — Jelwvah God formed them.' 

It is to be observed that there are two narratives 
at the beginning of the Mosaic records, different 
in style and manner, distinct and independent ; 
at first sight somewhat discrepant, but when 
strictly examined, perfectly compatible, and each 



one illustrating and completing the other. The 
first is contained in Gen. i. 1, to ii. 3 ; and the 
other, ii. 4, to iv. 26. A* is the case with the 
Scripture history generally, they consist of a few 
principal facts, detached anecdotes, leaving much 
of necessary implication which the good sense of 
the reader is called upon to supply ; and passing 
over large spaces of the history of life, upon which 
all conjecture would be fruitless. 

In the second of these narratives we read, 
' And Jehovah God formed the man [Heb. the 
Adam], dust from the ground [HOT^il, haada- 
mah~\, and blew into his nostrils the breath of 
life ; and the man became a living animal' (Gen. 
ii. 7). Here are two objects of attention, the 
organic mechanism of the human body, and the 
vitality with which it was endowed. 

The mechanical material, formed (moulded, or 
arranged, as an artificer models clay or wax) 
into the human and all other animal bodies, is 
called ' dust from the ground.' This would be a 
natural and easy expression to men in the early 
ages, before chemistry was known or minute phi- 
losophical distinctions were thought of, to convey, 
in a general form, the idea of earthy matter, the 
constituent substance of the ground on which we 
tread. To say, that of this the human and every 
other animal body was formed, is a position which 
would be at once the most easily apprehensible to 
an uncultivated mind, and which yet is the most 
exactly true upon the highest philosophical 
grounds. We now know, from chemical ana- 
lysis, that the animal body is composed, in' the 
inscrutable manner called organization, of car- 
bon, hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen, lime, iron, sul- 
phur, and phosphorus. Now all these are mineral 
substances, which in their various combinations 
form a very large part of the solid ground. 

Some of our readers may be sui-prised at our 
having translated JIT! &'S3 nephesh hhaya by 
living animal. There are good interpreters and 
preachers who, confiding in the common transla- 
tion, living soul, have maintained that here is 
intimated the distinctive pre-eminence of man 
above the inferior animals, as possessed of an im- 
material and immortal spirit. But, however true 
that doctrine is, and supported by abundant 
argument from both philosophy and the Scrip- 
tures, we should be acting unfaithfully if we were 
to affirm its being contained or implied in this 
passage. The two words are frequently conjoined 
in the Hebrew, and the meaning of the compound 
phrase will be apparent to the English reader, 
when he knows that our version renders it, in Gen. 
i. 20, ' creature that hath life ;' in verse 21, ' living 
creature,' and so in ch. ii. 19 ; ix. 12, 15, 16 ; and 
in ch. i. 30, ' wherein there is life.' 

This expression therefore sets before us the or- 
ganic life of the animal frame, that mysterious 
something which man cannot create nor restore, 
which baffles the most acute philosophers to search 
out its nature, and which reason combines with 
Scripture to refer to die immediate agency of the 
Almighty — ' in him we live, and move, and have 
our being.' 

The other narrative is contained in these words, 
'God created man in his own image : in tin- image 
of God created he him ; male and female created lie 
them' (Gen. i. 27). The image (D?y tselcm, 
resemblance, such as a shadow bears to the object 
which casts it) of God is an expression which 



breathes at once archaic simplicity and the most 
recondite wisdom : for what term could the most 
cultivated and copious language bring forth 
more suitable to the purpose 1 It presents to us 
man as made in a resemblance to the author of 
his being, a true resemblance, but faint and sha- 
dowy ; an outline, faithful according to its capa- 
city, yet infinitely remote from the reality : a 
distant form of the intelligence, wisdom, poioer, 
rectitude, goodness, and dominion of the Adorable 
Supreme. To the inferior sentient beings with 
which he is connected man stands in the place of 
God. We have every reason to think that none 
of them are capable of conceiving a being higher 
than man. All, in their different ways, look up 
to him as their superior ; the ferocious generally 
Hee before him, afraid to encounter his power, and 
the gentle court his protection and show their 
highest joy to consist in serving and pleasing 
him. Even in our degenerate state it is manifest 
that if we treat the domesticated animals with 
wisdom and kindness, their attachment is most 
ardent and faithful. 

Thus had man the shadow of the divine domi- 
nion and authority over the inferior creation. 
The attribute of power was also given to him, in 
his being made able to convert the inanimate ob- 
jects and those possessing- only the vegetable life, 
"nto the instruments and the materials for supply- 
is g his wants, and continually enlarging his 
sphere of command. 

In such a state of things knowledge and wis- 
dom are implied : the one quality, an acquaint- 
ance with those substances and their changeful 
actions which were necessary for a creature like 
man to understand, in order to his safety and com- 
fort ; the other, such sagacity as would direct him 
in selecting the best objects of desire and pursuit, 
and the right means for attaining them. 

Above all, moral excellence must have been 
comprised in this ' image of God ;' and not only 
forming a part of it, but being its crown of beauty 
and glory. The Christian inspiration, than 
which no more perfect disclosure of God is to take 
place on this side eternity, casts its light uppn 
this subject : for the apostle Paul, in urging the 
obligations of Christians to perfect holiness, evi- 
dently alludes to the endowments of the first man 
in two parallel and mutually illustrative epistles ; 
' — the new man, renewed in knowledge after the 
Image of Him that created him ; the new man 
which, after \kwto., according to] God, is created 
In righteousness and true holiness' (Col. iii. ] ; 
Eph. iv. 24). 

In this perfection of faculties, and with these 
high prerogatives of moral existence, did human 
nature, in its first subject, rise up from the creating 
hand. The whole Scripture-narrative implies 
that this state of existence was one of corre- 
spondent activity and enjoyment. It plainly 
represents the Deity himself as condescending to 
assume a human form and to employ human 
speech, in order to instruct and exercise the 
happy creatures whom (to borrow the just and 
beautiful language of the Apocryphal ' Wisdom') 
' God created for incorruptibility, and made him 
an image of his own nature.'* The only plau- 

sible objection to this is, that the condescension is 
too great, an objection which can be no other than 
a presumptuous limiting of the Divine goodness. 
It was the voice of reason which burst through the 
trammels of an infidel philosophy, when the cele- 
brated German, Fichte, wrote, ' Who, then, edu- 
cated the first human pair? A spirit bestowed 
its care upon them, as is laid down in an ancient 
and venerable original record, which, taken alto- 
gether, contains the profoundest and the loftiest 
wisdom, and presents those results to which all 
philosophy must at last return' (cited in the 
German Bible of Brentano, Dereser, and Scholz, 
vol. i., p. 16, Frankfort, 1820-1833). 

The noble and sublime idea that man thus 
had his Maker for his teacher and guide, pre- 
cludes a thousand difficulties. It shows us the 
simple, direct, and effectual method by which 
the newly formed creature would have communi- 
cated to him all the intellectual knowledge, and 
all the practical arts and manipulations, which 
were needful and beneficial for him. The uni- 
versal management of the * garden in Eden east- 
ward' (Gen. ii. 8), the treatment of the soil, the 
use of water, the various training of the plants 
and trees, the operations for insuring future pro- 
duce, the necessary implements and the way of 
using them ; — all these must have been included 
in the words ' to dress it and to keep it' (ver. 15). 
To have gained these attainments and habits 
without any instruction previous or concomitant, 
would have required the experience of men in 
society and co-operation for many years, with 
innumerable anxious experiments, and often the 
keenest disappointment. If we suppose that the 
first man and woman continued in their primitive 
state but even a few weeks, they must have re- 
quired some tools for ' dressing and keeping the 
garden C but if not, the condition of their chil- 
dren, when severe labour for subsistence became 
necessary, presented an obvious and undeniable 
need* They could not do well without iron in- 
struments. Iron, the most useful and the most 
widely diffused of all the metals, cannot be 
brought into a serviceable state without processes 
and instruments which it seems impossible to 
imagine could have been first possessed except in 
the xoay of supernatural communication. It 
would, in all reasonable estimation, have re- 
quired the difficulties and the experience of some 
centuries, for men to have discovered the means 
of raising a sufficient heat, and the use of fluxes : 
and, had that step been gained, the fused iron 
would not have answered the puiposes wanted. 
To render it malleable and ductile, it must be 
beaten, at a white heat, by long continued strokes 
of prodigious hammers. To make iron (as is the 
technical term) requires previous iron. If it be 
said that the first iron used by man was native 
metallic iron, of which masses have been found, 
the obvious reply is, not only the rarity of its oc- 
currence, but that, when obtained, it also requires 
previous iron instruments to bring it into any 
form for use, Tubal-cain most probably lived 
before the death of Adam ; and he acquired fame 
as ' a hammerer, a universal workman in brass 
and iron ' (Gen. iv. 22). This is the most literal 

* Wisd. Sol. ii. 23. eTr' cupdapalu, incorrupti- a better word. The exact meaning of the Greek 
bility, often denoting immortality. We have is, the whole combination of characteristic pecu- 
iranslated I5t6rrjs, nature, not being able to find liarities. 




translation of this grammatically difficult clause. 
In this brief description it is evident that much is 
implied beyond our power of ascertaining. The 
necessity and importance of the greatest hammers 
seem to be included. Considering these in- 
stances as representatives of many similar, we are 
confirmed in our belief that God not only gave to 
the earliest human families such knowledge as 
was requisite, but the materials- and the instru- 
ments without which knowledge would have been 
in vain. 

Religious knowledge and its appropriate habits 
also required an immediate infusion; and these 
are pre-eminently comprehended in the ' image of 
God.' On the one hand, it is not to be supposed 
that the newly created man and his female com- 
panion were inspired with a very ample share of 
the doctrinal knowledge which was communi- 
cated to their posterity by the successive and 
accumulating revolutions of more than four thou- 
sand j r ears : and, on the other, the idea of their 
being left in gross ignorance upon the existence 
and excellencies of the Being who had made them, 
their obligations to him,, and the way in which 
they might continue to receive the greatest bless- 
ings from him. It is self-evident that, to have 
attained such a kind and degree of knowledge, by 
spontaneous effort,- under even the favourable cir- 
cumstances of a state of negative innocence, 
would have been a long and arduous work. But 
the sacred narrative leaves no room for doubt 
upon this head. In the primitive style it tells 
of God as speaking to them, commanding, in- 
structing, assigning their work, pointing out their 
danger, and showing how to avoid it. All this, 
reduced to the dry simplicity of detail, is equi- 
valent to saying that the Creator, infinitely kind 
and condescending,.by the use of forms, and modes 
adapted to their capacity, fed their minds with 
truth,, gave them a ready understanding of it and 
that delight in it which constituted holiness, 
taught them to hold intercourse with himself by 
direct addresses in both praise and prayer, and 
gave some disclosures of a future state of blessed- 
ness when they should have fulfilled the condi- 
tions of their probation. 

An especial instance of this instruction and in- 
fusion of practical habits is given to us in the nar- 
rative : ' Out of the ground Jehovah God formed 
every beast of the field and every fowl of the air 
\Hebr. of the heavens] ; and brought them unto 
the man \IIcbr. the Adam], to see what he would 
call them' (Gen. ii. 19). This, taken out of the 
style of condescending anthropomorphism, amounts 
to such a statement as the following : the Creator 
had not. only formed man with organs of speech, 
but he taught him the use of them, by an imme- 
diate communication of the practical faculty and 
its accompanying intelligence; and he guided 
the man, as yet the solitary one of his species, to 
this among the first applications of speech, the 
designating of the animals with which he was 
connected, by appellative words which would 
both be the help of his memory and assist his 
mental operations, and thus would be introductory 
and facilitating to more enlarged applications of 
thought and language. We are further war- 
ranted, by the recognised fact, of the anecdotal 
and fragmentary structure of the Scripture 
history, to regard this as the selected instance for 
exhibiting a whole kind or class of operations or 

processes ; implying that, in the same or similar 
manner, the first man was led to understand some- 
thing of the qualities and relations of vegetables^ 
earthy matters, the visible heavens, and the other 
external objects to which he had a relation. 

The next important article in this primeval 
history is the creation of the human female. It 
has been maintained that the Creator formed 
Adam to be a sole creature, in some mode of an- 
drogynous constitution capable of multiplying 
from his own organization without a conjugate 
partner. This notion was advanced by Jacob (or 
James) Boehmen, the Silesian ' Theosophist,' and 
one very similar to it has been recently promul- 
gated by Baron Giraud (Philosophie G'atholiqne 
de VHistoire, Paris, 1841), who supposes that the 
' deep sleep ' (Gen. ii. 21) was a' moral fainting. 
(' defaillance '), the first step in departing from 
God, the beginning of sin, and that Eve was its 
personified product by some sort of divine concur- 
rence or operation. To mention these vagavies is 
sufficient for their refutation. Their absurd and 
nnscriptural character is stamped on their front. 
The narrative is given in the more summary man- 
ner in the former of the two documents : — ' Male 
and female created he them ' (Gen. i. 27). It 
stands a little more at length in a third docu- 
ment, which begins the fifth chapter, and has the 
characteristic heading or title by which the He- 
brews designated a separate work. ' This, the 
book of the generations of Adam. In the day 
God created Adam ; he made him in the likeness 
[rVDI demuth, a different word from that al- 
ready treated upon, and which merely signifies 
resemblance} of God, male and female he created 
them ; and he blessed them, and he called their 
name Adam, in the day of their being created ' 
(ver. 1, 2). The reader will observe that, in 
this passage, we have translated the word for man 
as the proper name, because it is so taken up in 
the next following sentence. 

The second of the narratives is more circumstan- 
tial : 'And Jehovah God said, it is not good 
the man's being alone : I will make for him a 
help suitable for him.' Then follows the passage 
concerning the review and the naming of the in- 
ferior animals ; and it continues — ' but for Adam 
he found not a help suitable for him. And Je- 
hovah God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the 
man [the Adam], and he slept : and he took one 
out of his ribs, and closed up the flesh in its place : 
and Jehovah God built up the rib which he had 
taken from the man into a woman, and he brought 
her to the man : and the man said, this is the 
hit ; bone out of my bones, arid flesh out of my 
flesh ; this shall be called woman lishaK], for this 
was taken from out of man [isA]' (Gen. ii. 18-23). 

Two remarkable words in this passage demand 
attention. ' Suitable for him' CllJJ3 chencgdo), 
literally, according to his front-prcscncc, than 
which no words could better express a peifect 
adaptation or correspondence. That we render 
Qj/Sn happaam, the hit, seems strange and 
even vulgar; but it appears necessary to the pre- 
servation of rigorous fidelity. The word, indeed, 
might have acquired a secondary adverbial 
meaning, like our English turn, when very era- 
phatical and partaking of the nature of an inter- 
jection; but there is only one passage in which 
that signification may be pleaded, and it is there 
repeated — 'now in the open place, now in the 




streets' (Prov. vii. 12). It properly means a 
smart, bold, successful stroke, and is used to sig- 
nify hitting the precise time of any action or re- 
quirement. In this first and primitive instance 
it is equivalent to saying, this is the very thing, 
this hits the mark, this reaches to what was de- 

This peculiar manner of the creation of the 
woman has, by some, been treated as merely a 
childish fable ; by others, as an allegorical fiction 
intended to represent the close relation of the 
female sex to the male, and the tender claims 
which women have to sympathy and love*. That 
such was the intention we do not doubt ; but 
why should that intention be founded upon a 
mythic allegory ? Is it not taught much better, 
and impressed much more forcibly, by its stand- 
ing not on a fiction, but on a fact ? We have 
seen that, under the simple archaic phrase that 
man was made of the ' dust of the ground,' is 
fairly to be understood' the truth, which is verified 
by the analysis of modern chemistry ; and, in the 
case of the woman, it is the same combination of 
materials, the same carbon, and hydrogen, and 
lime, and the rest ; only that, in the first instance, 
those primordial substances are taken immedi- 
ately, but in the second, mediately, having been 
brought into a state of organization. Let an 
unprejudiced mind reflect, and we think that he 
must see in this part of the will and working of 
the Almighty, at once, a simplicity gentle and 
tender, adapted to affect, in the strongest manner, 
the hearts of primitive men ; and yet, a subli- 
mity of meaning worthy of ' Jehovah of hosts,' at 
whose command stand all atoms and organisms, 
and ' who is wonderful in counsel and excellent 
in working.' 

The form of direct speech which appears here 
and in every part of these most ancient writings, 
and is a characteristic of the Hebrew and other 
ancient writings, should make no difficulty. It 
is the natural language of lively description ; and 
it is equal to saying, such was the wise and be- 
nevolent will of God, and such were the feelings 
and thoughts of Adam. The 24th verse is a 
comment or doctrinal application of the inspired 
writer ; pointing out the great law of marriage as 
founded in the original constitution of human 

The next particular into which the sacred his- 
tory leads us, is one which we cannot approach 
without a painful sense of its difficulty and deli- 
cacy. It stands thus in the authorized version : 
'And they were both naked, the man and his 
wife ; and were not ashamed ' (ii. 25). The 
common interpretation is, that, in this respect, the 
two human beings, the first and only existing 
ones, were precisely in the condition of the 
youngest infants, incapable of perceiving any 
incongruity in the total destitution of artificial 
clothing. But a little reflection will tell us, and 
the more carefully that reflection is pursued the 
more it will appear just, that this supposition is 
inconsistent with what we have established on 
solid grounds, the supernatural infusion into the 
minds of our first parents and into their nervous 
and muscular faculties, of the knowledge and 
practical habits which their descendants have 
had to acquire by the long process of instruction 
and example. We have seen the necessity that 
there must have been communicated to them, 

directly by their Creator, no inconsiderable mea- 
sure of natural knowledge and the methods of 
applying it, or their lives could not have been 
secured ; and of moral and spiritual ' knowledge, 
righteousness, and true holiness,' such a measure 
as would belong to the sinless state, and would 
enable them to render an intelligent and perfect 
worship to the Glorious Deity. It seems impos- 
sible for that state of mind and habits to exist 
without a correct sensibility to proprieties and 
decencies which infant children cannot under- 
stand or feel ; and the capacities and duties of 
their conjugal state are implied in the narrative. 
Further, it cannot be overlooked that, though we 
are entitled to ascribe to the locality of Eden the 
most bland atmosphere and delightful soil, yet 
the action of the sun's rays upon the naked skin, 
the range of temperature through the day and the 
night, the alternations of dryness and moisture, the 
various labour among trees and bushes, and ex- 
posure to insects, would render some protective 
clothing quite indispensable. 

From these considerations we feel ourselves 
obliged to understand the word D11J 1 (aroni) in 
that which is its most usual signification in the 
Hebrew language, as importing not an absolute, 
but a partial or comparative nudity. It is one 
of a remarkable family of words which appear to 
have branched off in different ways from the 
same root, originally "iy (ar or er), but assuming 
several early forms, and producing five or six di- 
vergent participials : but they all, and especially 
this arom, are employed to denote a stripping off 
of the upper garment, or of some other usual 
article of dress, when all the habiliments were 
not laid aside ; and this is a more frequent signi- 
fication than that of entire destitution. If it be 
asked, Whence did Adam and Eve derive this 
clothing? we reply, that, as a part of the divine 
instruction which we have established, they were 
taught to take off the inner bark of some trees, 
which would answer extremely well for this pur 
pose. If an objection be drawn from Gen. iii. 7, 
10, 11, we reply, that, in consequence of the trans 
gression, the clothing was disgracefully injured. 

Another inquiry presents itself. How long did 
the state of paradisiac innocence and happiness 
continue? Some have regarded the period as 
very brief, not more even than a single day ; but 
this manifestly falls very short of the time which a 
reasonable probability requires. The first man 
was brought into existence in the region called 
Eden; then he was introduced into a particular 
part of it, the garden, replenished with the richest 
productions of the Creator's bounty for the de- 
light of the eye and the other senses ; the most 
agreeable labour was required ' to dress and to 
keep it,' implying some arts of culture, preserva- 
tion from injury, training flowers and fruits, and 
knowing the various uses and enjoyments of the 
produce ; making observation upon the works of 
God, of which an investigation and designating of 
animals is expressly specified ; nor can we suppose 
that there was no contemplation of the magnifi- 
cent sky and the heavenly bodies : above all, the 
wondrous communion with the condescending 
Deity, and probably with created spirits of supe- 
rior orders, by which the mind would be excited, 
its capacity enlarged, and its holy felicity con- 
tinually increased. It is also to be remarked, 
that the narrative (Gen. ii. 19, 20) conveys the 


implication that some time was allowed to elapse, 
that Adam might discover and feel his want of a 
companion of his own species, ' a help correspond- 
ent to him.' 

These considerations impress us wTlh a sense of 
probability, amounting to a conviction, that a 
period not very short was requisite for the exercise 
of man's faculties, the disclosures of his happi- 
ness, and the service of adoration which he could 
pay to his Creator. But all these considera- 
tions are strengthened by the recollection that they 
attach to man's solitary state ; and that they all 
require new and enlarged application when the 
addition of conjugal life is brought into the ac- 
count. The conclusion appears irresistible that a 
duration of many days, or rather weeks or months, 
would be requisite for so many and important 

Thus divinely honoured and happy were the 
progenitors of mankind in the state of their 

The next scene which the sacred history brings 
before us is a dark reverse. Another agent comes 
into the held and successfully employs his arts 
for seducing Eve, and by her means Adam, from 
their original state of rectitude, dignity, and hap- 

Among the provisions of divine wisdom and 
goodness were two vegetable productions of 
wondrous qualities and mysterious significancy ; 
{ the tree of life in the midst of the garden, and 
the tree of knowledge of good and evil ' (Gen. ii. 9). 
It would add to the precision of the terms, and 
perhaps aid our understanding of them, if we were 
to adhere strictly to the Hebrew by retaining the 
definite prefix : and then we have ' the tree of the 
life ' and ' the tree of the knowledge.' Thus 
would be indicated the particular life of which 
the one was a symbol and instrument, and the 
fatal knowledge springing from the abuse of the 
other. At the same time, we do not maintain 
that these appellations were given to them at the 
beginning. We rather suppose that they were ap- 
plied afterwards,- suggested by the events and 
connection, and so became the historical names. 

We see no sufficient reason to understand, as 
some do, ' the tree of the life,' collectively, as im- 
plying a species, and that there were many trees 
of that species. The figurative use of the ex- 
pression in Rev. xxii. 10, where a plurality is 
plainly intended, involves no evidence of such a 
design in this literal narrative. The phraseology 
of the text best agrees with the idea of a single 
tree, designed for a special purpose, and not in- 
tended to perpetuate its kind. Though in the 
state of innocence, Adam and Eve might be liable 
to some corporal suffering from the changes of the 
seasons and the weather, or accidental circum- 
stances ; in any case of which occurring, this tree 
had been endowed by the bountiful Creator with 
a medicinal and restorative property, probably in 
the way of instantaneous miracle. We think 
also that it was designed for a sacramental or 
^symbolical purpose, a representation and pledge 
of ' the life,' emphatically so called, heavenly 
immortality when the term of probation should be 
happily completed. Yet we by no means supjjose 
that, this '.tree of the life ' possessed any intrinsic 
property of communicating immortality. In the 
latter view, it was a sign and seal of the divine 
promise. J3ut, with regard to <he former inten- 



tion, we see nothing to forbid the idea that it had 
most efficacious medicinal properties in its fruit, 
leaves, and other parts. Such were called tree3 
of life by the Hebrews (Prov. iii. 18; xi. 30 ; 
xiii. 12 ; xv. 4). 

The ' tree of the knowledge of good and evil ' 
might be any tree whatever ; it might be of any 
species even yet remaining, though, if it were so, 
we could not determine its species, for the plain 
reason, that no name, description, or information 
whatever is given that could possibly lead to the 
ascertainment. One cannot but lament the vul- 
gar practice of painters representing it as an 
apple-tree; and thus giving occasion to profane 
and silly witticisms. 

Yet we cannot but think the more reasonable 
probability to be, that it was a tree having poi- 
sonous properties, stimulating, and intoxicating, 
such as are found in some»exisfing species, espe- 
cially in hot climates. On this ground, the pro- 
hibition to eat or even touch the tree was a bene- 
ficent provision against the danger of pain and 
death. Should any cavil at the placing of so 
perilous a plant in the garden of delights, the 
abode of sinless creatures, we reply, that virulent 
poisons, mineral, vegetable, and animal, though 
hurtful or fatal to those who use them impro- 
perly, perform important and beneficial parts in 
the general economy of nature. 

But the revealed object of this ' tree of the 
knowledge of good and evil ' was that which 
would require no particular properties beyond 
some degree of external beauty and fruit of an 
immediately pleasant taste. That object was to 
be a test of obedience. For such a purpose, it is 
evident that to select an indifferent act, to be 
the object prohibited, was necessary ; as the obli- 
gation to refrain should be only that which arises 
simply, so far as the subject of the law can know, 
from the sacred will of the lawgiver. This does 
not, however, nullify what we have said upon 
the possibility, or even probability, that the tree in 
question had noxious qualities : for upon either 
the affirmative or the negative of the supposition, 
the subjects of this positive law, having upon all 
antecedent grounds the fullest, conviction of the 
perfect rectitude and benevolence of their Creator, 
would see in it the simple' character of a test, a 
means of proof, whether they would or would not 
implicitly confide in him. For so doing they 
had every possible reason ; and against any 
thought or mental feeling tending to the viola- 
tion of the precept, they were in possession of 
the most powerful motives. There was no diffi- 
culty in the observance. They were surrounded 
with a paradise of delights, and they had no rea- 
son to imagine that any good whatever would 
accrue to them from their seizing upon anything 
prohibited. If perplexity or doubt arose, they 
had ready access to their divine benefactor for 
obtaining information and direction. But they 
allowed the thought of disobedience to hum itself 
into a disposition, and then a purpose. 

Thus was the seal broken, the integrity of the 
heart was gone, the sin was generated, and the 
outward act was the consummation of the dire 
process. Eve, less informed, less cautious, less 
endowed with strength of mind, became the more 
ready victim. ' The woman, I. e ed,waa 

in the transgression;" but •Adam was not de- 
ceived' (1 Tim. ii. 14). He rushed knowingly 




and deliberately to ruin. The offence had grievous 
aggravations. It was the preference of a trifling 
gratification to the approbation of the Supreme 
Lord of the universe ; it implied a denial of the 
wisdom, holiness, goodness, veracity, and power 
of God ; it was marked with extreme ingratitude ; 
and it involved a contemptuous disregard of con- 
sequences, awfully impious as it referred to their 
immediate connection with the moral government 
of God, and cruelly selfish as it respected their 

The instrument of the temptation was a ser- 
pent ; whether any one of the existing kinds it is 
evidently impossible for us to know. Of that 
numerous order many species are of brilliant co- 
lours and playful in their attitudes and manners ; 
so that, one may well conoeive of such an object 
attracting and fascinating the first woman. 
Whether it spoke in an articulate voice, like the 
human, or expressed the sentiments attributed to 
it by a succession of remarkable and significant 
actions, may be a subject of reasonable question. 
The latter is possible, and it seems the preferable 
hypothesis, as, without a miraculous intervention, 
the mouth and throat of no serpent could form a 
vocal utterance of words ; and we cannot attri- 
bute to any wicked spirit the power of working 

This part of the narrative begins with the 
words ' And the serpent was crafty above every 
animal of the field' (Gen. iii. 1). It is to be ob- 
served that this is not said of the order of serpents, 
as if it were a general property of them, but of 
that particular serpent. Had the noun been in- 
tended generically, as is often the case, it would 
have required to be without the substantive verb ; 
for such is the usual Hebrew method of expressing 
universal propositions : of this the Hebrew scholar 
may see constant examples in the Book of Pro- 

Indeed, this ' cunning craftiness, lying in wait 
to deceive' (Eph. iv. 14), is the very character of 
that malignant creature of whose wily stratagems 
the reptile was a mere instrument. The existence 
of spirits, superior to man, and of whom some 
have become depraved, and are labouring to 
spread wickedness and misery to the utmost of 
their power, has been found to be the belief of all 
nations, ancient and modem, of whom we possess 
information. It has also been the general doc- 
trine of both Jews and Christians, that one of 
those fallen spirits was the real agent in this first 
and successful temptation. Of this doctrine, the 
declarations of our Lord and his apostles contain 
strong confirmation. In the same epistle in which 
St. Paul expresses his apprehension of some of the 
Corinthian Christians being seduced into error 
and sin, he adverts to the temptation of Eve as a 
monitory example : ' Lest Satan should get an 
advantage over us, for we are not ignorant of his 
devices. I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent 
beguiled Eve through his subtlety, so your minds 
should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in 
Christ. Such are false apostles, deceitful workers, 
transforming themselves into apostles of Christ ; 
and no marvel ; for even Satan himself is trans- 
formed into an angel of light' (2 Cor. ii. 11; xi. 
3, 14). In the book of the Revelation the great 
tempter is mentioned as ' that old (apxcuos, he 
of antiquity') serpent, who is called the devil 
and the Satan, who deceiveth the whole world 


(2 Cor. xii. 9 ; xx. 2). The language of Jasu» 
is a very definite allusion to the guilty trans- 
action of Eden : ' Ye are of your father the devil, 
and the desires of your father ye are determined 
(OeAeTe) to de. He was a man-murderer (avQpw 
■kokt6vos) from the beginning ; and in the truth 
he stood not, for truth is not in him. When 
he speaketh falsehood, out of his own (stores) 
he speaketh, for a liar is he, and the father ot 
it (i. e. of falsehood) ' (John viii. 44). The 
summary of these passages presents almost a 
history of the Fall — the tempter, his manifold 
arts, his serpentine disguises, his falsehood, his 
restless activity, his bloodthirsty cruelty, and 
his early success in that career of deception 
and destruction. The younger Rosenmiiller says 
upon this passage, ' That it was not a natural ser- 
pent that seduced Eve, but a wicked spirit which 
had assumed the form of a serpent ; and although 
Moses does not expressly say so, from the fear of 
affording a handle to superstition, yet it is probable 
that he designed to intimate as much, from the 
very fact of his introducing the serpent as a ra- 
tional being, and speaking ; also, that this opinion 
was universal among the nations of Central and 
Upper Asia, from the remotest antiquity, appears 
from this, that, in the system of Zoroaster, it. is 
related that Ahriman, the chief of wicked spirits, 
seduced the first human beings to sin by putting 
on the form of a serpent' (Schol. in Gen. iii. 1 ; 
and he refers to Kleuker's German version of the 
Zendavesta, and his own Ancient and Modern 
Oriental Country). 

The condescending Deity, who had held gra- 
cious and instructive communion with the pa- 
rents of mankind, assuming a human form and 
adapting all his proceedings to their capacity, 
visibly stood before them ; by a searching inter- 
rogatory drew from them the confession of their 
guilt, which yet they aggravated by evasions and 
insinuations against God himself; and pro- 
nounced on them and their seducer the sentence 
due. On the woman he inflicted the pains of 
child-bearing, and a deeper and more humiliating 
dependence upon her husband. He doomed the 
man to hard and often fruitless toil, instead of 
easy and pleasant labour. On both, or rather on 
human nature universally, he pronounced the 
awful sentence of death. The denunciation of 
the serpent partakes more of a symbolical cha- 
racter, and so seems to carry a strong implication 
of the nature and the wickedness of the concealed 
agent. The human sufferings threatened are all, 
excepting the last, which will require a separate 
consideration, of a remedial and corrective kind. 
The pains and subjection of the female sex, when 
they come into connection with the benignant 
spirit of the gospel, acquire many alleviations, 
and become means of much good in relative life, 
which reacts with a delightful accumulation of 
benefit upon the Christian wife, mother, daughter, 
sister, friend. So also human labour, in the cul- 
tivation of the various soils, in all geognostic 
operations, in all fabrics and machinery, in means 
of transit by land, and in the wonders of naviga- 
tion over the ocean, which for many ages was 
regarded as the barrier sternly forbidding inter- 
course ; — while these have been the occasion of 
much suffering, they have been always towering 
over the suffering, counteracting and remedying 
it, diminishing the evil, and increasing the sum 


of good. Further, under the influence of true 
Christianity, these and all the other mechanical 
and liberal arts are consecrated to the universal 
improvement of mankind ; they afford means of 
spreading the gospel, multiplying every kind of 
good agency and increasing its force. Thus, ' in 
all labour there is profit,' and ' labour itself be- 
comes a pleasure.' 

Of a quite different character are the penal 
denunciations upon the serpent. If they be un- 
derstood literally, and of course applied to the 
whole order of Ophidia (as, we believe, is the 
common interpretation), they will be found to be 
so flagrantly at variance with the most demon- 
strated facts in their physiology and economy, as 
to lead to inferences unfavourable to belief in 
revelation. Let us examine the particulars : — 

' Because thou hast done this, cursed art thou 
above all cattle ;' very properly so rendered, for 
we have not an English singular noun to answer 
to TOrn, so as to effect a literal translation of 
'above every behemah.' Bat the serpent tribe 
cannot be classed with that of the behemoth. The 
word is of very frequent occurrence in the Old 
Testament; and though, in a few instances, it 
seems to be put for brevity so as to be inclusive 
of the flocks as well as the herds, and in poetical 
diction it* sometimes stands metonymically for 
animals generally (as Job xviii. 3 ; Ps. lxxiii. 22; 
Eccles. iii. 18, 19, 21); yet its proper and uni- 
versal application is to the large animals (pachy- 
derms and ruminants), such as the elephant, 
camel, deer, horse, ox, rhinoceros, hippopotamus, 
&c. [Behemoth]. 

As little will tlie declaration, ' cursed — ,' agree 
with natural truth. It may, indeed, be supposed 
to be verified in the shuddering which persons 
generally feel at the aspect of any one of the order 
of serpents ; but this takes place also in many 
other cases. It springs from fear of the formi- 
dable weapons with which some species are armed, 
as few persons know beforehand which are venom- 
ous and which are harmless ; and, after all, 
this is rather an advantage than a curse to the 
animal. It is an effectual defence without effort. 
Indeed, we may say that no tribe of animals is 
so secure from danger, or is so able to obtain its 
sustenance and all the enjoyments which its capa- 
city and habits require, as the whole order of ser- 
pents. If, then, we decline to urge the objection 
from the word behemah, it is difficult to conceive 
that serpents have more causes of suffering than 
any other great division of animals, or even so 

Further, ' going upon the belly ' is to none of 
them a punishment. With some differences of 
mode, their progression is produced by the pushing 
of scales, shields, or rings against the ground, by 
muscular contractions and dilatations, by elastic 
springings, by vertical undulations, or by hori- 
zontal wrigglings; but, in every variety, the en- 
tire organization — skeleton, muscles, nerves, in- 
teguments — is adapted to the mode of progression 
belonging to each species. That mode, in every 
variety of it, is sufficiently easy and rapid (often 
- very rapid) for all the purposes of the animal's 
life and the amplitude of its enjoyments. To 
imagine this mode of motion to be, in any sense, 
' a change from a prior attitude and habit of the 
erect kind, or being furnished with wings, indi- 
cates a perfect ignorance of the anatomy of ser- 



pents. Yet it has been said by learned and 
eminent theological interpreters, that, before this 
crime was committed, the serpent probably did 
'not go upon his belly, but moved upon the 
hinder part of his bodv, with his head, breast, and 
belly upright' (Clarke's Bible, p. 1690). This 
notion may have obtained credence from the fact 
that some of the numerous serpent species, when 
excited, raise the neck pretty high ; but the pos- 
ture is to strike, and they cannot maintain it in 
creeping except for a very short distance. 

Neither do they 'eat dust.' All serpents are 
carnivorous : their food, according to the size and 
power of the species, is taken from the tribes of 
insects, worms, frogs, and toads, and newts, birds, 
mice and other small quadrupeds, till the scale 
ascends to the pythons and boas, which can mas- 
ter and swallow very large animals. The excel- 
lent writer just cited, in his anxiety to do honour, 
as he deemed it, to the accuracy of Scripture 
allusions, has said of the serpent, ' Now that he 
creeps with his very mouth upon the earth, he 
must necessarily take his food out of the dust, and . 
so lick in some of the dust with it.' But this is 
not the fact. Serpents habitually obtain their 
food among herbage or in water ; they seize their 
prey with the mouth, often elevate the head, and 
are no more exposed to the necessity of swallowing 
adherent earth than are carnivorous birds or qua- 
drupeds. At the same time, it may be understood 
figuratively. 'Eating the dust is but another 
term for grovelling in the dust ; and this is equi- 
valent to being reduced to a condition of mean- 
ness, shame, and contempt. — See Micah vii. 17 ' 
(Bush on Genesis, vol. i. p. 84. New York, 1840). 
But these and other inconsistencies and diffi- 
culties (insuperable they do indeed appear to us) 
are swept away when we consider the fact before 
stated, that the Hebrew is JlTl t^n3!1 hanna- 
chash haiah, the serpent was, &c, and that it 
refers specifically and personally to a rational and 
accountable being, the spirit of lying and cruelty, 
the devil, the Satan, the old serpent. That God, 
the infinitely holy, good, and wise, should have 
permitted any one or more celestial spirits to 
apostatize from purity, and to be the successful 
seducers of mankind, is indeed an awful and over- 
whelming mystery. But it is not more so than 
the permitted existence of many among mankind, 
whose rare talents and extraordinary command of 
power and opportunity, combined with extreme de- 
pravity, have rendered them the plague and cruse of 
the earth ; and the whole merges into the awful 
and insolvable problem, Why has the All-perfect 
Deity permitted evil at all? We are firmly 
assured that He will bring forth, at last, the 
most triumphant evidence that ' He is right- 
eous in all his ways, and holy in all his 
works.' In the mean time, our happiness lies in 
the implicit confidence which we cannot but feel 
to be due to the Being of Infinite Perfection. 

The remaining part of the denunciation upon 
the false and cruel seducer sent a beam of light 
into the agonized hearts of our guilty first parents: 
'And enmity will I put between thee and the 
woman, and between thy seed and her seed : he 
will attack thee [on] the head, and thou wilt 
attack him [at] the heel.' The verb here used 
twice, occurs in only two other places of the O. 
T. : Job ix. 17, ' Who breaketh upon me with a 
tempestuous horror;' and Ps. exxxix. 11, 'And if 




I say, Surely darkness will burst upon me,' i. e. 
as a sudden and impervious covering. The mean- 
ing is established by Gesenius after Umbreit as 
the idea of a violent and eager' assault. Christian 
interpreters generally regard this as the Protevan- 
gelium, the first gospel-promise, and we think 
with good reason. It was a manifestation of 
mercy : it revealed a Deliverer, who ' should be a 
human being, in a peculiar sense the oilspring of 
the female, who should also, in some way not yet 
made known, counteract and remedy the injury 
inflicted, and who, though partially suffering from 
the malignant power, should, in the end, com- 
pletely conquer it and convert its very success 
into its own punishment - (J. Pye Smith, Scrip- 
ture Testimony to the Messiah, vol. i. p. 226). 

The awful threatening to man was, ' In the day 
that thou eatest of it, thou wilt die the death.' 
Beyom, literally in the day, was also used as a 
general adverb of time, denoting when, without 
a strict limilation to a natural day. The verbal 
repetition is a Hebrew idiom to represent not only 
. the certainty of the action, but its intensity and 
efficacy : we therefore think that the phrase die 
the death would more exactly convey the sense of 
the original than what some have proposed dying 
thou shalt die. The infliction is Death in the 
most comprehensive sense, that which stands op- 
posed to Life, the life of not only animal enjoy- 
ment, but holy happiness, the life which com- 
ported with the image of God. This was lost by 
the fall ; and the sentence of physical death was 
pronounced, to be executed in due time. Divine 
mercy gave a long respite. 

The same mercy was displayed in still more 
tempering the terrors of justice. The garden of 
delights was not to be the abode of rebellious 
creatures. But before they were turned out into 
a bleak and dreary wilderness, God was pleased 
to direct them to make clothing suitable to their 
new and degraded condition, of the skins of ani- 
mals. That those animals had been offered in 
sacrifice is a conjecture supported by so much 
probable evidence, that we may regard it as a 
well-established truth. Any attempt to force back 
the way, to gain anew the tree of life, and take 
violent or fraudulent posssession, would have been 
equally impious and nugatory. The sacrifice 
(which all approximative argument obliges us to 
admit), united with the promise of a deliverer, 
and the provision of substantial clothing, ' con- 
tained much hope of pardon and grace. The 
terrible debarring by lightning flashes and their 
consequent thunder, and by visible supernatural 
agency (Gen. iii. 22-24), from a return to the 
bowers of bliss, are expressed in the characteristic 
patriarchal style of anthropopathy; but the meaning 
evidently is, that the fallen creature is unable by 
any efforts of his own to reinstate himself in the 
favour of God, and that whatever hope of restora- 
tion he may be allowed to cherish must spring 
~ solely from free benevolence. Thus, in laying the 
f first stone of the temple which shall be an im- 
mortal habitation of the Divine glory, it was 
manifested that 'Salvation is of the Lord,' and 
that ' grace reigneth through righteousness unto 
eternal life.' 

From this time we have little recorded of the 
lives of Adam and Eve. Their three sons are 
mentioned with important circumstances in con- 
nection with each of" them. See the articles Cain, 

Abel, and Seth. Cain was probably born in 
the year after the fall ; Abel, possibly some years 
later ; Seth, certainly one hundred and thirty 
years from the creation of his parents. After that, 
Adam lived eight hundred years, and had sons 
and daughters, doubtless by Eve, and then he 
died, nine hundred and thirty years old. In that 
prodigious period many events, and those of great 
importance, must have occurred; but the wise 
providence of God has not seen fit to preserve to 
us any memorial of them, and scarcely any ves- 
tiges or hints are afforded of the occupations and 
mode of life of men through the antediluvian 
period [Antediluvians]. — J. P. S. 

2. ADAM, a city at some distance east from 
the Jordan, to which, or beyond which, the over- 
flow of the waters of that river extended when 
the course of the stream to the Dead Sea was 
stayed to afford the Israelites a passage across its 
channel. Our public version follows the keri, 
or marginal reading, of Josh. iii. 16, ' very far 
from Adam ' (Dl&b) ; but the Jcethib, or textual 
reading, is, ' in Adam ' (D1K3). The former 
suggests that the overflow extended beyond Adam, 
the latter that it reached thereto. It appears 
from 1 Kings iv. 12; vii. 46, that Zarethan was 
on the west side of the Jordan, in the tribe of 
Manasseh : whereas certainly Adam #as on the 
east side of that river, where the Israelites al- 
ready were. The text must therefore signify that 
the overflow reached on the east side to Adam, 
and on the west to Zarethan: and it admits of 
the construction that the ' heap of waters ' was 
' beside ' Zarethan and beyond Adam, instead of 
that Zarethan itself was ' beside Adam.' The 
name of the city Adam (red) was probably de- 
rived from the colour of the clay in the neigh- 

ADAMAH. [Admah.] 
ADAMANT. [Shamir.] 
ADAR (Yjg ; 'ASdp, Esth. iii. 7 ; the Mace- 
donian Avcrrpos) is the sixth month of the civil 
and the twelfth of the ecclesiastical year of the 
Jews. The name was first introduced after the 
Captivity. The following are the chief days in 
it which are set apart for commemoration : — The 
7th is a fast for the death of Moses (Deut. 
xxxiv. 5, 6). There is some difference, however, 
in the date assigned to his death by some ancient 
authorities. Josephus (Antiq. iv. 8) states that 
he died on the first of this month ; which also 
agrees with Midrash Megillath Esther, cited by 
Reland ( Antiq. Hebr. \v. 10): whereas theTalmud- 
ical tracts Kiddushim and Sota give the seventh 
as the day. It is at least certain that the latter 
was the day on which the fast was observed. On 
the 9th there was a fast in memory of the conten- 
tion or open rupture of the celebrated schools of 
Hillel and Shammai, which happened but a few 
years before the birth of Christ. The cause of 
the dispute is obscure (Wolf's Biblioth. Hebr. 
ii. 826). The 13th is the so-called ' Fast of 
Esther.' Iken observes (Antiq. Hebr. p. 150) 
that this was not an actual fast, but merely a 
commemoration of Esther's fast of three days 
(Esth. iv. 16), and a preparation for the ensuing 
festival. Nevertheless, as Esther appears, from 
the date of Hainan's edict, and from the course 
of the narrative, to have fasted in Nisan, Buxtorf 
adduces from the Rabbins the following account 


of the name of this fast, and of the foundation 
of its observance in Adar (Synag. Jud. p. 554) : 
that the Jews assembled together on the 13th, in 
the time of Esther, and that, after the example of 
Moses, who fasted when the Israelites were about 
to engage in battle -with the Amalekites, they 
devoted that day to fasting and prayer, in prepa- 
ration for the perilous trial which awaited them 
on the morrow. In this sense, this fast would 
stand in the most direct relation to the feast of 
Purim. The 13th was also, ' by a common 
decree,' appointed as a festival in memory of the 
death of Nicanor (2 Mace. xv. 36). The 14th 
and loth were devoted to the feast of Purim 
(Esth. ix. 21). In case the year was an inter- 
calary one, when the month of Adar occurred 
twice, this feast was first moderately observed in 
the intercalary Adar, and then celebrated with 
full splendour in the ensuing Adar. The former 
of these two celebrations was then called the 
lesser, and the latter the great Purim. These 
designations do not apply, as Home has erro- 
neously stated (Introduction, iii. 177), to the two 
days of the festival in an ordinary year, but to its 
double celebration in an intercalary year. — J. N. 

adarconim (CMta'ps i.q. tofKSpfi ; 

Sept. Spaxp'O and xp vff °vs ; Vulg. drachma and 
aureus). Gesenius and most others are of opinion 
that these words, which occur in 1 Chron. xxix. 7; 
Ezra viii. 27; ii. 69; Neh. vii. 70-72, denote the 
Persian Doric, a gold coin, which must have been 
in circulation among the Jews during their sub- 
jection to the Persians. The X is prosthetic ;. and 
■ {"DTI occurs in- the Rabbins. Dr. Lee disputes 
the etymology of the word with Gesenius : but it is 
sufficient to observe that the Daric, which is radi- 
cally included in these words, is not, as might be 
fancied, derived from the name of any particular 

king, but from the Persian \ \ J dara, a king. The 

last of these words seems to identify itself with the 
Greek Bpax/J-V ; and, observing that in some of 
the texts it is manifestly connected with words 
denoting weight, and in none with names of coins, 
he expresses some doubt of its being the Sapeticbs 
(daric) of the Greeks. He is rather inclined to 
suppose, with Salmasius, that the Arabic dirhem 

*Jb>£ or >><■} presents us with the same word. 

The opinion of Heeren (Researches, i. 410) would, 
indirectly, go to discountenance the notion that the 
daric is to be here understood. He affirms that 
' before the time of Darius Hystaspes the Persians 
had no coinage of their own, and that the daricus 
coined by him was probably a medal (Herod, iv. 
166) of the finest gold. When the darics became 
current, especially after the mercenary troops 
were paid in them, their numbers must have 
been greatly augmented : yet Strabo assures us 
(1. xv. p. 1068) that the coin was by no means 
abundant, among the Persians, and tliat gold was 
employed by them rather in decoration than as 
a circulating medium.' This, however, is of 
little real consequence ; for it proceeds on the 
erroneous supposition that the coin derived its 
name from the first Darius, and could not have 
previously.existed. In the later day of Strabo the 
coin may have become scarce, although once 
plentiful. Be this as it may, the daric is of 
interest, not only as the most ancient gold coin of 



which any specimens have been preserved to the 
present day, but as the earliest coined money 
which, we can be sure, was known to and used 
by the Jews. The distinguishing mark of the 
coin was a crowned archer, who appears with 
some slight variations on different specimens. His 

garb is the same which is seen in the sculptures 
at Persepolis, and the figure on the coin is called, 
in numismatics, Sagittarius. The specimens 
weighed by Dr. Bernard were fifteen grains hea- 
vier than an English guinea, and their intrinsic 
value may, therefore, be reckoned at twenty-five 
shillings (Eckhel, Doctrina Numorum Veterum ; 
Bernard, De Meyisuris et Ponderibus). 

ADARGAZERIN CI^JTffi?)- This is a 
Chaldee word which occurs in Dan. iii. 2, 3, 
where the titles of the Babylonian officers are 
enumerated. It is difficult, perhaps impossible, 
to determine the particular office which the word 
describes ; and opinions and versions have differed 
greatly. The Sept., which is followed by the 
Vulgate, has rvpavvoi. Our version has ' trea- 
surers ;' and although we do not know the reason 
on which they proceeded, we may find one in the 
fact that gaza (yd(a), which seems the principal 
element of the word, means a treasury, and was 
avowedly adopted by the Greeks from the Per- 
sians. Jacchiades, who identifies all these officers 
with those of the Turkish court and government, 
compares the present to the defterdars, who have 
the charge of the receipts and disbursements of 
the public treasury. Gesenius and others conceive 
that the word means chief-judges (from TlX, 
magnificent, and P"1T3, deciders) ; but Dr. Lee, 
while admitting the uncertainty of the whole 
matter, seems to prefer seeking its meaning in the 

Persian \S\ fire, and j£& passing ; and hence 

concludes that the Adargazerin were jjrobably 
officers of state who presided over the ordeals by 
fire, and other matters connected with the govern- 
ment of Babylon. This last explanation is not, 
however, new, being the one rejected by Gesenius. 
AD ASA, or Adarsa ('ASacra), called also by 
Josephus Adazer, Adaco, and Acodaco, a city 
in the tribe of Ephraim. said to have been four 
mile? from Beth-horon, and not far from Gfpphna 
( Joseph. Antiq. xii.17 ; Euseb. Onomast. in'A5a<ra). 
It was the scene of some important transactions in 
the history of the Maccabees (1 Mac. vii. 40, 45; 
Joseph. Antiq. xii. 17 ; Bell. Jud. i. 1). 

ADASHIM (D^hj?; Sept. <put6s; Vulg. 
lens). ' ' is the interpretation given 
by our own and most other versions, and there is 
no reason to question its accuracy. In Syria 

lentiles are still called in Arabic (vuJui addas 
(Russel, N. H. of Aleppo, i. 74). Lentiles ap- 
pear to have been chiefly used for making a kind 
of pottage. The red pottage for which Esau bar- 

f 2 




tered his birthright was of lentiles (Gen. xxv. 29- 
34). The term red was, as with us, extended to 
yellowish brown, which must have been the true 
colour of the pottage, if derived from lentiles. 
The Greeks and Romans also called lentiles red 
(see authorities in Celsius, i. 105). Lentiles were 
among the provisions brought to David when he 
fled from Absalom (2 Sam. xvii. 2S), and a field 
of lentiles was the scene of an exploit of one of 
David's heroes (2 Sam. xxiii. 11). From Ezek. 
iv. 9, it would appear that lentiles were sometimes 
used as bread. This was, doubtless, in times of 
scarcity, or by the poor. Sonnini ( Travels, p. 603, 
English translation) assures us that in southern- 
most Egypt, where corn is comparatively scarce, 
lentiles mixed with a little barley form almost 
the only bread in tise among the poorer classes. 
It is called bettan, is of a golden yellow colour, 
and is not bad, although rather heavy. In that 
country, indeed, probably even more than in Pa- 
lestine, lentiles anciently, as now, formed a chief 
article of food among the labouring classes. This 
is repeatedly noticed by ancient authors ; and so 
much attention was paid to the culture of this use- 
ful pulse, that certain varieties became remark- 
able for their excellence. The lentiles of Pe- 
lusium, in the part of Egypt nearest to Pales- 
tine, were esteemed both in Egypt and foreign 
countries (Virg. Georg. i. 22S) ; and this is pro- 
bably the valued Egyptian variety which is men- 
tioned in the Mishna (tit. Kilvim, xviii. 8) as 
neither large nor small. Large quantities of 
lentiles were exported from Alexandria (Augustin. 
Comtn. in Ps. xlvi.). Pliny, in mentioning two 
Egyptian varieties, incidentally lets us know that 
one of them was red, by remarking that they like 
a red soil, and by speculating whether the puilse 
may not have thence derived the reddish colour 
which it imparted to the pottage made with it 
{Hist. Nat. xviii. 12). This illustrates Jacob's red 
pottage. Dr. Shaw (i. 257) also states that 
these lentiles easily dissolve in boiling, and form 
a red or chocolate coloured pottage, much 
esteemed in North Africa and Western Asia. 
Putting these facts together, it is likely that the 
reddish lentile, which is now so common in Egypt 
(Descript. de VEgypte, xix. 65), is the sort to 
which all these statements refer. 

The tomb-paintings actually exhibit the opera- 
tion of preparing pottage of lentiles, or, as Wilkin- 
son {Anc. Egyptians, ii. 387) describes it, ' a man 
engaged in cooking lentiles for a soup or porridge ; 
his companion brings a bundle of faggots for the 
fire, and the lentiles themselves are seen standing 
near him in wicker baskets.' The lentiles of Pa- 
lestine have been little noticed by travellers. 

lentile pottage was prepared every day, and dis- 
tributed freely to strangers and poor people, in 
memory of the transaction between Esau and 
Jacob, which they (erroneously) believe to have 
taken place at this spot. 

The lentile (Ervum lens~) is an annual plant, 
and the smallest of all the leguminosa; which are 
cultivated. It rises with a weak stalk about 
eighteen inches high, having pinnate leaves at 
each joint composed of several pairs of narrow 
leaflets, and terminating in a tendril, which sup» 
ports it by fastening about some other plant. 

"Na.ii (Voyage Nouveau, p. 13) mentions lentiles 
along with com and pease, as a principal article 
of traffic at Tortoura ; D'Arvieux (Manoires, ii. 
237) speaks of a mosque, originally a Christian 
church, over the patriarchal tomb at Hebron, 
connected with which was a large kitchen, where 

Lentiles (Cicer lens). 

The small flowers, which come out of the sides of 
the branches on short peduncles, three or four 
together, are purple, and are succeeded by the 
short and flat legumes, which contain two or 
three flat round seeds slightly curved in the 
middle. The flower appears in May, and the 
seeds ripen in July. When ripe, the plants are 
rooted up, if they have been sown along with other 
plants, as is sometimes done ; but they are cut 
down when grown by themselves. They are 
threshed, winnowed, and cleaned like corn. 

ADBEEL, one of the twelve sons of Ishmael, 
and founder of an Arabian tribe (Gen. xxv. 
13, 16). 

ADDER, the English name of a kind of ser- 
pent, is a dialectical variation of the same word 
in a variety of languages of the Gothic and Teu- 
tonic family. Another name, varying, in the 
old European tongues, from ag, ach, to hag, 
has more connection with the Semitic ; and in 
the south of Europe, where the Latin and its 
derivatives prevail, both are represented by the 
word vipera (viper). The first radically indicates 
poison ; the second, pain, distress, strife ; the third, 
parturition of offspring, not in the state of an egg, 
but of the perfect animal. Though not clearly 
distinguished, in common acceptation, from in- 
noxious snakes, all strictly indicate serpents 
armed with poisonous fangs, and therefore all are 
truly viviparous. In the English version of the 
Bible the name 'adder' occurs several times, and is 
there used not for a particular species, but gene- 
rally for several of this dangerous class of reptiles, 
without, therefore, being intended to be confined to 
a genus, in the sense modern systematists would 
ascribe to that denomination. We have before us 


a list, far from complete, of the erpetology of Pales- 
tine, Arabia, and Egypt, in which there are, 
among forty-three species indicated, about eight 
whose bite is accompanied with a venomous effu- 
sion, and therefore almost all very dangerous. 
The Hebrew names ajoplicable to them, depending 
upon some radical word descriptive of a property 
or character of the animal, are in themselves 
mostly insufficient to distinguish the one meant 
specifically ; and therefore recourse must be had to 
the kindred dialects, and to a careful study of 
each species. This object is so far from being 
accomplished, that, in our present state of know- 
ledge, we deem it best to discuss, under the words 
Serpent and Viper, all the Hebrew names not 
noticed in this article, and to refer to them those 
occurring in our version under the appellations of 
' asp,' ' cockatrice,' &c. ; and likewise to review the 
allusions to colossal boas and pythons, evidently 
meant, in some places, where the terms Jfl than 
and I'On thannin are used ; and, finally, to 
notice water-snakes and muraenae, which translators 
and biblical naturalists have totally overlooked, 



although they must exist in the lakes of the 
Delta, are abundant on the north coast of Africa, 
and often exceed eight feet in length. 

In this place we shall retain that genus alone 
which Laurenti and Cuvier have established upon 
characters distinguished from the innocuous colu- 
ber and the venomous vipera, and denominated 
naja, one of the Sanscrit forms of the same appel- 
lation whence we have the word hag, before 
noticed ; and to the same root, in the Semitic 
tongues, we may refer the Hebrew 31^3^ ach- 
sub, found in Psalm cxi. 3, and declared to be 
derived from a verb implying ' to bend back upon 
oneself ' — a characteristic which most, if not all. of 
the species of the genus Naja evince. The Chaldee 
paraphrases render it by t^^Dy acchabis, per- 
haps erroneously applied to the spider, which, if 
we refer to several of the noxious arachnides, pos- 
sesses nevertheless the faculty of springing back 
upon its victim, and therefore comes within the 
radical meaning of the term. 

The genus Naja — Haridi (?) of Savary — is dis- 
tinguished by a plaited head, large, very venomous 

Naja Haje ; and the form of Oneph from the 
Egyptian ?ilonuments. 

fangs, a neck dilatable under excitement, which 
raises the ribs of the anterior part of the body into 
the form of a disk or hood, when the scales, usu- 
ally not imbricated, but lying in juxta-position, 
are separated, and expose the skin, which at that 
time displays bright iridescent gleams, contrast- 
ing highly with their brown, yellow, and bluish 
colours. The species attain at least an equal, if 
not a superior, size to the generality of the genus 
viper; are more massive in their structure ; and 
some possess the faculty of self-inflation to triple 
their diameter, gradually forcing the body up- 
wards into an erect position, until, by a convulsive 
crisis, they are said suddenly to strike backwards 
at an enemy or a pursuer. With such powers of 
destroying animal life, and with an aspect at 
once terrible and resplendent, it may be easily ima 
gined how soon fear and superstition would com- 
bine, at periods anterior to historical data, to raise 
these monsters into divinities, and endeavour to 
deprecate their wrath by the blandishments of 
worship; and how design and cupidity would 
teach these very votaries the manner of subduing 
their ferocity, of extracting their instruments of 

Naja Tripudians and Cobra di Oapel'.o; or, Hoodfid 
and Spectacled Snakes. 

mischief, and making them subservient to the won- 
der and amusement of the vulgar, by using cer- 
tain cadences of sound which affect their bearing, 
and exciting in them a desire to perform a kind of 
pleasurable movements that may be compared to 
dancing. Hence the nagas of the East, the hag- 
wor?ns of the West, and the haje, have all been 
deified, styled agathodaemon or good spirit ; and 
figures of them occur wherever the superstition of 
Pagan antiquity has been accompanied by the 
arts of civilization. 

The most prominent species of the genus at 
present is the naja tripudians, cobra di capello, 
flooded or spectacled snake of India, venerated by 
the natives ; even by the serpent-charmers styled 
the good serpent to this day, and yet so ferocious 
that it is one of the very few that* will attack a 
man when surprised in its haunt, although it may 
be gorged with prey. This species is usually 
marked on the nape with two round spots, trans- 
versely connected in the form of a pair of spec- 
trioles; but among several varieties, one. perhaps 
distinct, is without the marks, and has a g lossy 
golden hood, which may make it identical with 




the naja haje of Egypt, the undoubted Eih-nupbi, 
cneph, or agathodajmon of ancient Egypt, and 
accurately represented on the walls of its temples, 
in almost innumerable instances, both in form 
and colour. This serpent also inflates the skin 
on the neck, not in the expanded form of a hood, 
but rather into an intumefaction of the neck. 
As in the former, there is no marked difference of 
appearance between the sexes ; but the psilli, or 
charmers, by a particular pressure on the neck 
have the power of rendering the inflation of the 
animal, already noticed as a character of the 
genus, so intense, that the serpent becomes rigid, 
and can be held out horizontally as if it were a 
rod. This practice explains what the soothsayers 
of Pharaoh could perform when they were op- 
posing Moses, and reveals one of the names by 
which the Hebrews knew the species ; for although 
the text (Exod. iv. 3) uses, for the rod of Aaron 
converted into a serpent, the word KTI3 nachash, 
and subsequently (vii. 15) j^D thannin, it is plain 
that, in the second passage, the word indicates 
' monster, 1 as applied to the nachash just named — 
the first being an appellative, the second an epi- 
thet. That the rods of the magicians of Pharaoh 
were of the same external character is evident 
from no different denomination being given to 
them : therefore we may infer that they used a 
real serpent as a rod — namely, the species now 
called haje — for their imposture; since they no 
doubt, did what the present serpent-charmers per- 
form with the same species, by means of the 
temporary asphyxiation, or suspension of vitality, 
before noticed, and producing restoration to active 
life by liberating or throwing down. Thus we 
have the miraculous character of the prophet's 
mission shown by his real rod becoming a serpent, 
and the magicians' real serpents merely assuming 
the form of rods ; and when both were opposed, 
in a state of animated existence, by the rod 
devouring the living animals, conquering the 
great typical personification of the protecting di- 
vinity of Egypt. Nachash may, therefore, with 
some confidence, be assumed to have been the 
Hebrew name, or at least one of the names, of the 
naja haje, el haje, and haje nacher, of the Arabs.* 
This species may be regarded as extending to India 
and Ceylon ; and probably the naja tripudians 
is likewise an inhabitant of Arabia, if not of 
Egypt, although the assertion of the fact (common 
in authors) does not exclude a supposition that 
they take the two species to be only one. We are 
disposed to refer the ' winged 1 or 'flying' serpent to 
the naja tripudians, in one of its varieties, becauee 
— with its hood dilated into a kind of shining wings 
on each side of the neck, standing, in undulating 
(P)S1J?D) motion, one-half or more erect, rigid, 
and fierce in attack, and deadly poisonous, yet 
still denominated ' good spirit,' and in Egypt 
ever figured in combination with the winged 

* Nachash was intensely the serpent of serpents 
with the Hebrews ; and when figured with the 
crowns or caps of Upper and Lower Egypt, was 
the crowned serpent and basilisk. It is evident 
that nach-as/i led authors, and Pliny among the 
number, to affix the term aspis to the haje, which 
however he did not. recognise as the sacred serpent 
of Egypt. The true asp is a small viper, not- 
withstanding the opinion of M. Geoffrey to the 

globe — it well may have received the name of 
PpJJ* saraph, and may thus meet all the valid ob- 
jections, and conciliate seemingly opposite com- 
ments (see Num. xxi. 6, 8 ; Deut. viii. 15 ; 
Isa. xvi. 29 ; xxx. 6 ; and Paxton's Illustra- 
tions), excepting the authority of Herodotus, 
Pausanias, and Bochart, which, with all the re- 
spect due to their names, is not now sufficient to 
establish the existence of a kind of serpents whose 
structure is contrary to the laws of zoological or- 

Achsub (IIB^JJ naja (?), reflectrix, noils') 
is another name of a serpent which may be con- 
sidered as specifically different from the former, 
though it is most probably one more of this group 
of terrible creatures. The root of the name im- 
plies bending back, recurving, but not coiling up, 
for all snakes have that faculty. The syllable 
ach, however, shows a connection with the former 
denominations ; and both are perfectly reconcil- 
able with a serpent very common at the Cape of 
Good Hope, not unfrequent in Western Africa, 
and probably extending over that whole continent, 
excepting perhaps Morocco. It is the ' poff-adder ' 
of the Dutch colonists, about three feet in length, 
and about six inches in circumference at the 
middle of the body ; the head is larger than is 
usual in serpents; the eyes are large, and very 
brilliant; the back beautifully marked in half 
circles, and the colours black, bright yellow, and 
dark brown; the belly yellow; the appearance at 
all times, but chiefly when excited, extremely 
brilliant ; the upper jaw greatly protruding, some- 
what like what occurs in the shark, places the 
mouth back towards the throat, and this structure 
is said to be connected with the practice of the 
animal when intending to bite, to swell its skin 
till it suddenly rises up, and strikes backwards as 
if it fell over.f It is this faculty which appears 
to be indicated by the Hebrew name achsub, and 
therefore we believe it to refer to that species, or 
to one nearly allied to it. The Dutch name 
(poff-adder, or spooch-adder) shows that, in the act 
of swelling, remarkable eructations and spittings • 
take place, all which no doubt are so many warn- 

* In Isaiah xiv. 29, and xxx. 6, the epithet 
fjSiyKD meopheph, 'vibrating,' (rendered 'flying' 
in A. V.) is another form for 'winged,' and occurs 
in passages unconnected with the events in Exo- 
dus. Both bear metaphorical interpretations. 

A further confirmation of the ' fiery serpents,' 
or ' serpents of the burning bite,' being najas, 
occurs in the name Ras om Haye (Cape of the 
Haje serpents), situated in the locality where geo- 
graphers and commentators agree that the children 
of Israel were afflicted by these reptiles. Should 
it be objected that these are the haje, and not the 
spectacle-snake, it may be answered that both 
Arabs and Hindoos confound the species. 

f The writer is indebted for the details concern- 
ing this reptile to the kindness of Captain Stevens 
of the Royal Marines, who killed several ; and from 
whom we leam the further fact that, in order to 
ascertain the truth of the universal report con- 
cerning the mode of striking back, ascribed to the 
serpent, he had a quill introduced into the vent of 
one lying dead on the table, and blown into. The 
skin distended till the body rose up nearlv all its 
length : he then Caused the experiment to stop, 
'from the alarming attitude it assumed. 


ings, the bite being fatal. The poff-adder usually 
resides among brushwood in stony places and 
rocks, is fond of basking in the sun, rather slow- 
in moving, and is by nature timid [Serpent ; 
Viper].— C. H. S. 

ADDON (P^K), one of several places men- 
tioned in Neh. vii. 61, being towns in the land of 
captivity, from which those who returned to Pa- 
lestine were unable to ' shew their father's house, 
or their seed, whether they were of Israel.' This, 
probably, means that they were unable to furnish 
such undeniable legal proof as was required in 
such cases. And this is in some degree explained 
by the subsequent (v. 63) mention of priests who 
were expelled the priesthood because their descent 
was not found to be genealogically registered. 
These instances show the importance which was 
attached to their genealogies by the Jews [Ge- 

ADIABENE ('ASia^vfi), the principal of 
the six provinces into which Assyria was di- 
vided. Pliny (Hist. Nat. v. 12) and Ammianus 
(xxiii. 6, § 20) comprehend the whole of As- 
syria under this name, which, however, properly 
denoted only the province which was watered by 
the rivers Diab and Adiab, or the Great and 
Little Zab (Dhab), which fiow into the Tigris 
below Nineveh (Mosul), from the north-east. This 
region is not mentioned in Scripture; but in 
Josephus, its queen Helena and her son Izates, 
who became converts to Judaism, are very often 
named (Joseph. Antiq. xx. 2, 4 ; Bell. Jud. ii. 
16, 19; v. 4, 6, 11). 

ADIDA ('A&5a; Vulg. Addus), a fortified 
town in the tribe of Judah. In 1 Mace. xii. 38, 
we read that Simon Maccabaeus set up ' Adida 
in Sephela ('AdiSa iv rfj 2e$?)Aa), and made it 
strong with bolts and bars.' Eusebius says that 
Sephela was the name given in his time to the 
open country about Eleutheropolis. And this 
Adida in Sephela is probably the same which 
is mentioned in the next chapter (xiii. 13) as 
1 Adida over against the plain,' where Simon 
Maccabseus encamped to dispute the entrance 
into Judaea of Tryphon, who had treacherously 
seized on Jonathan at Ptolemais. In the parallel 
passage Josephus (Antiq. xiii. 6, 4) adds that this 
Adida was upon a hill, before which lay the 
plains of Judaea. Lightfoot, however, contrives 
to multiply the single place mentioned in the 
Maccabees and Josephus into four or five dif- 
ferent towns (see Chorog. Decad. § 3). One of 
the places which Josephus calls Adida (Bell. Jud. 
iv. 9, 1) appears to have been near the Jordan, 
and was probably the Hadid of Ezra ii. 32. 

ADJURATION. This is a solemn act or 
appeal, whereby one man, usually a person vested 
ivith natural or official authority, imposes upon 
another the obligation of speaking or acting as if 
under the solemnity of an oath. We find the 
word yQKTI used in this sense in Cant. ii. 7 ; 
iii. 5, &c. In the New Testament the act of 
adjuration is performed with more marked effect ; 
as when the high-priest thus calls upon Christ, 
' I adjure thee by the living God, tell us' &c. — 
'E£op/ci£co <re Kara rov Qeov rod ^Sivros, &c. 
(Matt. xxvi. 61). The word used here is that 
by which the LXX. render the Hebrew (see also 
Mark v. 7 ; Acts xix. 13 ; 1 Thess. v. 27). An 
oath, although thus imposed upon one without 



his consent, was not only binding, but solemn 
in the highest degree ; and when connected with 
a question, an answer was compulsory, which 
answer being as upon oath, any falsehood in it 
would be perjury. Thus our Saviour, who had 
previously disdained to reply to the charges brought 
against him, now felt himself bound to answer the 
question put to him. The abstract moral right of 
any man to impose so serious an obligation upon 
another without his consent, may very much be 
doubted — not, indeed, as compelling a true an- 
swer, which a just man will give under all cir- 
cumstances, but as extorting a truth which he 
might have just reasons for withholding. 

ADMAH, one of the cities in the vale of 
Siddim (Gen. x. 19), which had a king of its 
own (Gen. xiv. 2). It was destroyed along with 
Sodom and Gomorrah (Gen. xix. 24 ; Hos. xi. 8). 

ADMONI (TlEHK ; Sept. wpp^s ; Vulg. 
rufus). This word means red-haired, and is so 
rendered in the ancient versions, although ours 
understands a ruddy complexion. It would thus 
appear that Esau (Gen. xxv. 25) and David 
(1 Sam. xvi. 12; xvii. 42) were red-haired. Red 
hair is so uncommon in the East, that it forms a 
particular distinction, as in the Scriptural in- 
stances ; but it is by no means unknown, espe- 
cially in mountainous countries. The writer has 
observed it in Persia repeatedly, accompanied 
with the usual fresh complexion. Such hair and 
complexion together seem to have been regarded 
as a beauty among the Jews. The personal cha- 
racters of Esau and David appear to agree well 
with the temperament which red hair usually 

ADONAI Cj'nN ; Sept. Kipws, lord, master), 
the old plural form of the noun j'HN adon, 
similar to that with the suffix of the first person ; 
used as the pluralis exeellentice, by way of dig- 
nity, for the name of Jehovah. The similar 
form with the suffix is also used of men, as of 
Joseph's master (Gen. xxxix. 2, 3, sqJ) ; of Joseph 
himself (Gen. xiii. 30, 33 ; so also Isa. xix. 4). 
The Jews, out of superstitious reverence for the 
name Jehovah, always, in reading, pronounce 
Adonai where Jehovah is written ; and hence the 
letters ni!"^ are usually written with the points 
belonging to Adonai [Jehovah]. The view that 
the word exhibits a plural termination without 
the affix is that of Gesenius (Thesaur. s. v. \)1), 
and seems just, though rather disapproved by Pro- 
fessor Lee (Lex. in )1*7N). The latter adds that 
'Our English bibles generally translate pftfl*, by ' 
LORD, in capitals ; when preceded by jTlXn, 
they translate it God ; when J"11JOV tzabaoth 
follows, by Lord ; as in Isa. iii. 1, ' The Lord, 
the Lord of Hosts.' The copies now in use are 
not, however, consistent in this respect. 

ADONIBEZEK (P.$"tf«$, lord of Bezek ; 
Sept. 'AScavifeCeK), king or lord of Bezek, a town 
which Eusebius (in Be$7<) places 17 miles east of 
Neapolis or Shechem. The small extent of the 
kingdoms in and around Palestine at the time of 
its invasion by the Hebrews is shown by the tact 
that this petty melek had subdued no less than 
seventy of them; and the barbarity of the war- 
usages" in those early times is painfully shown by 
his cutting oft' all the thumbs and great toes of 
his prisoners, and allowing them no food but that 




which they gathered under his. table. These con- 
quests made Adonibezek ' a triton among the 
minnows ;' and we find him at the head of the 
confederated Canaanites and Perizzites, against 
whom the tribes of Judah and Simeon marched 
after the death of Joshua. His army was routed 
and himself taken prisoner. The victors failed 
not to express their indignation at the mode in 
which he had treated his captives, by dealing 
with him in the same manner. His conscience 
was then awakened to the enormity of his con- 
duct, and in his own treatment he recognised a 
severe but just application of the lex talionis. 
That the act was so intended by the captors is 
very clear ; and it is strange that this strong re- 
probation of his conduct by the Israelites should 
have been construed into an example of their own 
barbarous usages in war. Adonibezek was taken 
to Jerusalem, where he died, b.c. 1449. 

ADONIJAH (-injriX, Jehovah [is] my 
Lord ; Sept. 'AScowas), the fourth son of David, 
by Haggith. He was born after his father 
became king, but when he reigned over Judah 
only (2 Sam. iii. 4). According to the Oriental 
notion developed in the article Absalom, Ado- 
nijah might have considered his claim superior 
to that of his eldest brother Amnon, who was 
born while his father was in a private station ; 
but not to that of Absalom, who was not only his 
elder brother, and born while his father was a 
king, but was of royal descent on the side of his 
mother. When, however, Amnon and Absalom 
were both dead, he became, by order of birth, 
the heir-apparent to the throne. But this order 
had been set aside in favour of Solomon, who was 
born while his father was king of all Israel. Ab- 
salom perished in attempting to assert his claim 
of primogeniture, in opposition to this arrange- 
ment. Unawed by this example, Adonijah took 
the same means of showing that he was not 
disposed to relincpdsh the claim of primogeniture 
which now devolved upon him. He assumed 
the state of an heir-apparent, who, from the ad- 
vanced age of David, must soon be king. But it 
does not appear to have been his wish to trouble 
his father as Absalom had done ; for he waited 
till David appeared at the point of death, when 
he called around him a number of influential 
men, whom he had previously gained over, and 
caused himself to be proclaimed king. This was 
a formidable attempt to subvert the appointment 
made by the Divine king of Israel ; for Adonijah 
was supported by such men as Joab, the ge- 
neral-in-chief. and Abiathar, the high-priest; both 
of whom had followed David in all his fortunes. 
The adhesion of such men, and the previous 
defection of the nation to Absalom, show the 
strength of the hereditary principle among the 
Israelites. In all likelihood, if Absalom had 
waited till David was on his death-bed, Joab and 
Abiathar would have given him their support ; but 
his premature and unnatural attempt to dethrone 
his father, disgusted these friends of David, who 
might not otherwise have been adverse to his 
claims. This danger was avoided by Adonijah : 
but his plot was, notwithstanding, defeated by the 
prompt measure taken by David, who directed So- 
lomon to be at once proclaimed, and crowned, 
and admitted to the real exercise of the sovereign 
power. Adonijah then saw that all was lost, and 

fled to the altar, which he refused to leave with- 
out a promise of pardon from King Solomon. 
This he received, but was warned that any further 
attempt of the same kind would be fatal to him. 
Accordingly, when, some time after the death of 
David, Adonijah covertly endeavoured to re- 
produce his claim through a marriage with Abi- 
shag, the virgin widow of his father [Abishag], 
his design was at once penetrated by the king, 
by whose order he was instantly put to death 
(1 Kings i.-ii. 13-25). 

ADONIRAM (tn^, lord of height, i. q. 
high lord ; Sept. 'ASooi/ipdfj., 1 Kings iv. 6). This 
name is exhibited in the contracted form of Ado- 
eam (Q"VnN) in 2 Sam. xx. 24 ; 1 Kings xii. 
18; and of Hadoram (Dinn) in 2 Chron. x. 

1. ADONIRAM, or Hadoram, son of Toi, 
king of Hamath, who was sent by his father to 
congratulate David on his victory over their com- 
mon enemy Hadarezer, king of Syria (1 Chron. 
xviii. 10). This prince is called Joram in 2 
Sam. viii. 10. 

2. ADONIRAM. A person of this name is 
mentioned as receiver-general of the imposts in 
the reigns of David, Solomon, and Rehoboam. 
Commentators have been much at a loss to de- 
termine whether the office was held by one person 
for so long a period, or by two or three persons 
of the same name. It appears very unlikely that 
even two persons of the same name should succes- 
sively bear the same office, in an age when no 
example occurs of the father's name being given 
to his son. We find also that not more than 
forty-seven years elapse between the first and last 
mention of the Adoniram who was ' over the 
tribute ;' and as this, although a long term of 
service, is not too long for one life, and as the 
person who held the office in the beginning of 
Rehoboam's reign had served in it long enough 
to make himself odious to the people, it appears 
on the whole most probable that one and the same 
person is intended throughout. Only one incident 
is recorded in connection with this person. When 
the ten tribes seceded from the house of David, 
and made Jeroboam king, Rehoboam sent Ado- 
niram among them, for the purpose, we may pre- 
sume, of collecting the usual imposts, which had 
become very heavy. Perhaps he had been rigid in 
his invidious office under Solomon : at all events 
the collector of the imposts which had occasioned 
the revolt was not the person whose presence was 
the most likely to sooth the exasperated passions of 
the people. They rose upon him, and stoned him 
till he died. Rehoboam, who was not far off, took 
warning by his fate, and, mounting his chariot, 
returned with all speed to Jerusalem (1 Kings 
xii. 18). 

ADONIS. [Thammuz.] 

ADONI-ZEDEK (Pjy^lSf ; Sept. 'AWt- 
/3e(<EK, confounding him with Adonibezek). The 
name denotes lord of justice, i. e. just lord, but 
some would rather have it to mean king of ' Zedelc. 
He was the Canaanitish king of Jerusalem when 
the Israelites invaded Palestine ; and the similarity 
of the name to that of a more ancient king of (as 
is supposed) the same place, Melchi-zedek (king 
of justice, or king of Zedek), has suggested that 
Zedek was one of the ancient names of Jerusalem. 
Be that as it may, this Adonizedek was the first 


of the native princes that attempted to make 
head against the invaders. After Jericho and 
Ai were taken, and the Gibeonites had succeeded 
in forming a treaty with the Israelites, Adoni- 
zedek was the first to rouse himself from the stupor 
which had fallen on the Canaanites (Josh. i. 9-11), 
and he induced the otherAmoritish kings of Hebron 
— Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon — to join him in a 
confederacy against the enemy. They did not, how- 
ever, march directly against the invaders, but went 
and besieged the Gibeonites, to punish them for the 
discouraging example which their secession from 
the common cause had afforded. Joshua no sooner 
heard of this than he marched all night from 
Gilgal to the relief of his allies ; and falling unex- 
pectedly upon the besiegers, soon put them to utter 
rout. The pursuit was long, and was signalized by 
Joshua's famous command to the sun and moon, as 
well as by a tremendous hail-storm, which greatly 
distressed the fugitive Amorites [Joshua] . The 
five kings took refuge in a cave ; but were ob- 
served, and by Joshua s order the mouth of it was 
closed with large stones, and a guard set over it, 
until the pursuit was over. When the pursuers 
returned, the cave was opened, and the five kings 
brought out. The Hebrew chiefs then set their 
feet upon the necks of the prostrate monarchs — 
an ancient mark of triumph, of which the monu- 
ments of Persia and Egypt still afford illus- 
trations. They were then slain, and their bodies 
hung on trees until the evening, when, as the law 
forbade a longer exposure of the dead (Deut. 
xxi. 23), they were taken down, and cast into 
the cave, the mouth of which, was filled up 
with large stones, which remained long after 
(Josh. x. 1-27). The severe treatment of these 
Icings by Joshua has been censured and defended 
with equal disregard of the real circumstances, 
which are, that the war was avowedly one of ex- 
termination, no quarter being given or expected 
on either side: and that the war-usages of the 
Jews were neither worse nor better than those of 
the people with whom they fought, who would 
most certainly have treated Joshua and the other 
Hebrew chiefs in the same manner, had they fallen 
into their hands. 

ADOPTION. The Old Testament does not 
contain any word equivalent to this ; but the act 
occurs in various forms. The New Testament 
has the word vlodeala often (Rom. viii. 15, 23 ; 
ix. 4 ; Gal. iv. 5 ; Eph. i. 5) ; but no example of 
the act occurs. The term itself is well defined, 
and the act described, in the literal signification 
of the Greek word. It is the placing as a son of 
one who is not so by birth. 

The practice of adoption had its origin in the 
desire for male offspring among those who have, 
in the ordinary course, been denied that blessing, 
or have been deprived of it by circumstances. 
This feeling is common to our nature; but its 
operation is less marked in those countries where 
the equalizing influences of high civilization lessen 
the peculiar privileges of the paternal character, 
and where the security and the well-observed laws 
by which estates descend and property is trans- 
mitted, withdraw one of the jirincipal induce- 
ments to the practice. And thus most of the 
instances in the Bible occur in the patriarchal pe- 
riod. The law of Moses, by settling the relations 
of families and the rules of descent, and by for- 
mally establishing the Levirate law,which in some 



sort secured a representative posterity even to a 
man who died without children, appears to have 
put some check upon this custom. The allu- 
sions in the New Testament are mostly to practices 
of adoption which then existed among the Greeks 
and Romans, and rather to the latter than to the 
former; for among the more highly civilized Greeks 
adoption was less frequent than among the Romans. 
In the East the practice has always been com- 
mon, especially among the Semitic races, in 
whom the love of offspring has at all times been 
strongly manifested. And here it may be ob- 
served that the additional and peculiar stimulus 
which the Hebrews derived from the hope of 
giving birth to the Messiah, was inoperative with 
respect to adoption, through which that privilege 
could not be realized. 

In early times there appears to have been no 
limitation or restriction of the exercise of the 
power of adoption. But as the arrangements of 
society became more complicated, some restric- 
tions were imposed, and certain public forms 
were made necessary to legalize the act. We are 
not much acquainted with the usages in this 
matter, which, in different ages, were, among the 
Hebrews, connected with the act of adoption. 
This is partly because the practice had ceased to 
be common among them by the time the sources 
of information became more open. And, indeed, 
the culpable facility of divorce in later times ren- 
dered unnecessary those adoptions which might 
have arisen, and in earlier times did arise, from 
the sterility of a wife. The want of positive in- 
formation, however, is supplied, in seme degree, 
by our acquaintance with the analogous practices 
of other Eastern nations. 

It is scarcely necessary to say that adoption 
was confined to sons. The whole Bible history 
affords no example of the adoption of a female ; for 
the Jews certainly were not behind any Oriental 
nation in the feeling expressed in the Chinese 
proverb — ' He is happiest in daughters who has 
only sons ' (Man. sur les Chinois, t. x. 149). 

The first instances of adoption which occur in 
Scripture are less the acts of men than of women, 
who, being themselves barren, give their female 
slaves to their husbands, with the view of adopt- 
ing the children they may bear. Thus Sarah 
gave her handmaid Hagar to Abraham ; and the 
son who was born, Ishmael, appears to have been 
considered as her son as well as Abraham's, until 
Isaac was bom. In like manner Rachel, having 
no children, gave her handmaid Bilhah to her 
husband, who had by her Dan and Naphtali 
(Gen. xxx. 5-9) ; on which his other wife, Leah, 
although she had sons of her own, yet fearing that 
she had left off bearing, claimed the right of giv- 
ing her handmaid Zilpah to Jacob, that she might 
thus increase their number ; and by this moans 
she had Gad and Asher (Gen. xxx. 9-13). In 
this way the greatest possible approximation to a 
natural relation was produced. The child was 
the son of the husband, and, the mother being the 
property of the wife, the progeny must be her 
property also ; and the act of more particular 
appropriation seems to have been that, at the time 
of birth, the handmaid brought forth her child 
'upon the knees of the adoptive mother' (Gen; 
xxx. 3). Strange as this custom may seem, it 
is in accordance with the notions of representation 
which we find very prevalent in analogous states of 



society. We do not see the uiges of explaining away 
customs we do not like, or wuicli do not agree with 
our own notions, by alleging that by this expression 
nothing more is meant than that the son was to 
be dandled and brought up upon the knees of the 
adoptive mother. In this case the vicarious bear- 
ing of the handmaid for the mistress was as com- 
plete as possible ; and the sons were regarded as 
fully equal in right of heritage with those by the 
legitimate wife. This privilege could not, how- 
ever, be conferred by the adoption of the wife, but 
by the natural relation of such sons to the husband. 
A curious fact is elicited by the peculiar cir- 
cumstances in Sarah's case, which were almost 
the only circumstances that could have arisen to 
try 'the question, whether a mistress retained her 
power, as such, over a female slave whom she had 
thus vicariously employed, and over the progeny 
of that slave, even though by her own husband. 
The answer is given, rather startlingly, in the 
affirmative in the words of Sarah, who, when the 
birth of Isaac had wholly changed her feelings 
and position, and when she was exasperated by 
the offensive conduct of Hagar and her son, ad- 
dressed her husband thus, ' Cast forth this bond- 
woman and her son ; for the son of this bond- 
woman shall not be heir with my son, even with 
Isaac' (Gen. xxi. 10). 

A previous instance of adoption in the history 
of Abraham, when as yet he had no children, 
appears to be discoverable in his saying, ' One 
born in my house is mine heir.' This unquestion- 
ably denotes a house-born slave, as distinguished 
from one bought with money. Abraham had 
several such ; and the one to whom he is sup- 
posed here to refer is his faithful and devoted 
steward Eliezer. This, therefore, is a case in 
which a slave was adopted as a son — a practice 
still very common in the East. A boy is 
often purchased young, adopted by his master, 
brought up in his faith, and educated as his son ; 
or if the owner has a daughter, he adopts him 
through a marriage with that daughter, and the 
family which springs from this union is counted 
as descended from him. But house-born slaves are 
usually preferred, as these have never had any home 
but their master's house, are considered members 
of his family, and are generally the most faithful 
of his adherents. This practice of slave adoption 
was very common among the Romans ; and, as 
such, is more than once referred to by St. Paul 
(Rom. viii. 15; 1 Cor. ii. 12), the transition from 
the condition of a slave to that of a son, and the 
privilege of applying the tender name of ' Father ' 
to the former ' Master,' affording a beautiful 
illustration of the change which takes place from 
the bondage of the law to the freedom and privi- 
leges of the Christian state. 

As in most cases the adopted son was to be 
considered dead to the family from which he 
sprung, the separation of natural ties and con- 
nections was avoided by this preference of slaves, 
who were mostly foreigners or of foreign descent. 
For the same reason the Chinese make their adop- 
tions from children in the hospitals, who have 
been abandoned by their parents (Mem. sur les 
C'hinois, t. vi. 325). The Tartars are the only 
people we know who prefer to adopt their near 
relatives— nephews or cousins, or, failing them, a 
Tartar of their own banner (Ibid. t. iv. 136). The 
only Scriptural example of this kind is that in 

which Jacob adopted his own grandsons Ephraini 
and Manasseh to be counted as his sons. Some 
have questioned whether this was really an act of 
adoption : but it seems to us that there is no way in 
which an act of adoption could be more clearly 
expressed. Jacob says to Joseph, their father — 
' Thy two sons, Ephraim and Manasseh, shall be 
mine : .... as Reuben and Simeon (his two 
eldest sons), they shall be mine. But thy issue 
which thou begettest after them shall be thine ' 
(Gen. xlviii. 6). The object of this remarkable 
adoption was, that whereas Joseph himself could 
only have one share of his father's heritage along 
with his brothers, the adoption of his two sons 
enabled Jacob, through them, to bestow two por- 
tions upon his favourite son. One remarkable 
effect of this adoption was that the sons of Jacob, 
and the tribes which sprung from them, thus be- 
came thirteen instead of twelve ; but the ultimate 
exclusion of Levi from a share of territory, recti- 
fied this so far as regarded the distribution of 
lands in Canaan. 

The adoption of Moses by Pharaoh's daughter 
(Exod. ii. 1-10) is an incident rather than a 
practice; but it recalls what has just been stated 
respecting the adoption of outcast children by the 

A man who had only a daughter would na- 
turally wish to build up a family, to be counted 
as his own, through her. We have seen that, 
under such circumstances, the daughter is often 
married to a freed slave, and the children 
counted as those of the woman's father, or the 
husband himself is adopted as a son. An in- 
stance of the former kind occurs in 1 Chron. ii. 
34, sq. Sheshan, of the tribe of Judah, gives his 
daughter to Jarha, an Egyptian slave (whom, as 
the Targum premises, he no doubt liberated on 
that occasion) : the posterity of the marriage are 
not, however, reckoned to Jarha, the husband of 
the woman, but to her father, Sheshan, and as his 
descendants they take their heritage and station 
in Israel. The same chapter gives another in- 
stance. Machir (grandson of Joseph) gives his 
daughter in marriage to Hezron, of the tribe of 
Judah. She gave birth to Segub, who was the 
father of Jair. This Jair possessed twenty-three 
cities in the land of Qilead, which came to him 
in right of his grandmother, the daughter of 
Machir ; and he acquired other towns in the same 
quarter, which made up his possessions to three- 
score towns or villages (1 Chron. ii. 21-24; 
Josh. xiii. 9; 1 Kings iv. 13). Now this Jair, 
though of the tribe of Judah by his grandfather, 
is, in Num. xxxii. 41, counted as of Manasseh, 
for the obvious reason which the comparison of 
these texts suggests, that, through his grand- 
mother, he inherited the property, and was the 
lineal representative of Machir, the son of Ma- 
nasseh. This case is of some importance from the 
ground which it offers for the opinion of those who 
account for the difference between the pedigree of 
Christ as given by Matthew, and that in Luke, 
by supposing that the former is the pedigree through 
Joseph, his supposed father, and the latter through 
his mother Mary. This opinion, which will be 
examined in another place [Genealogy], sup- 
poses that Mary was the daughter of Heli, and 
that Joseph is called his son (Luke iii. 23) be- 
cause he was adopted by Heli when he married 
his daughter, who was an heiress, as is proved by 


the fact of her going to Bethlehem to be regis- 
tered, when in the last stage of pregnancy. 

The following are among the foreign customs con- 
nected with adoption which are supposed to be 
alluded to in the New Testament; and in explana- 
tion of these it may be remarked, that by the time 
of Christ the Jews had, through various channels, 
become well acquainted with the more remark- 
able customs of the Greeks and Romans; and the 
perfect familiarity of St. Paul, in particular, with 
such customs would be probable from circum- 
stances, even were it not constantly apparent in 
his Epistles. In John viii. 36, 'If the Son shall 
make you free, ye shall be free indeed,' is sup- 
posed by Grotius and other commentators to refer 
to a custom in some of the cities of Greece, and 
elsewhere, called a<5e\<po9e<Tia, whereby the son 
and heir was permitted to adopt brothers and ad- 
mit them to the same rights which he himself 
enjoyed. But it seems more likely that the refer- 
ence was to the more familiar Roman custom, 
by which the son, after his father's death, often 
made free such as were born slaves in his house 
(Theophil. Antecensor, Institut. Imp. Justinian, i. 
6. 5). In Rom. viii. 23, vloQzaiav atreKSexofievot, 
'anxiously waiting for the adoption," the former 
word appears to be used in a sense different from 
that which it bears in ver. 15, and to signify the 
consummation of the act there mentioned ; in which 
point of view it is conceived to apply to the two- 
fold ceremony among the Romans. The one was the 
private act, between the parties; and if the per- 
son to be adopted was not already the slave of the 
adopter, this private transaction involved the pur- 
chase of hbn from his parents, when practicable. 
In this manner Caius and Lucius were purchased 
from their father Agrippa before their adoption by 
Augustus. The other was the public acknowledg- 
ment of that act on the part of the- adopter, when 
the adopted person was solemnly avowed and 
declared to be his son. The peculiar force and 
propriety of such an allusion in an epistle to the 
Romans must be very evident. 

In Gal. iv. 5, 6, there is a very clear allusion 
to the privilege of adopted slaves to address their 
former master by the endearing title of Abba, or 
Father. Selden has shown that slaves were not 
allowed to use this word in addressing the master 
of the family to which they belonged, nor the 
corresponding title of Mama, mother, when speak- 
ing to the mistress of it (De Succ. in Bona De- 
funct, secund. Ilcbr. c. iv.). 

A more minute investigation than would here 
be in place, might discover other allusions to the 
custom of adoption. The ideas and usages 
connected with the adoption of an official suc- 
cessor are considered elsewhere [Investituue]. 

ADORAIM (D^n*? 5 Sept. 'ASwpaty), a town 
in the south of Judah, enumerated along with 
Hebron and Mareshah, as one of the cities forti- 
fied by Rthoboam (2 Chron. xi. 9). Under the 
name of Adora it is mentioned in the Apocrypha 
(1 Mace. xiii. 20), and also often by Josephus 
Antiq. viii. 10, 1 ; xiii. 6, 4. 15, 4; Bell. Jucl. 
i. 2, 6. 8, 4), who usually connects Adora with 
Maressa, as cities of the later Idumaea. It was 
captured by Hyrcanus at the same time with 
Maressa, and rebuilt by Gabinius (Joseph. 
Antiq. xiii. 9, 1 ; xiv. 5, 3). Tins town does not 
occur in any writer alter Josephus, until the re- 



cent researches of Dr. Robinson, who discovered 
it under the name of Dura, the first feeble letter 
having been dropped. It is situated five miles 
W. by S. from Hebron, and is a large village, 
seated on the eastern slope of a cultivated hill, 
with olive-groves and fields of grain all around. 
There are no ruins (Robinson's Bib. Researches, 
iii. 2-5). 

ADORATION. This word is compounded 
of ad ' to,' and os, oris, ' the mouth,' and literally 
signifies to apply the hand to the mouth,' that is, 
' to kiss the hand.' The act is described in 
Scripture as one of worship. Job says : — ' If 
I had beheld the sun when it shined, or the 
moon, walking in brightness ; and my heart had 
been secretly enticed, or my mouth had kissed 
my hand ; this also were an iniquity to be 
punished by the judge' (Job xxxi. 26, 27). 
And this very clearly intimates that kissing the 
hand was considered an overt act of worship in 
the East. So Minutius Felix (De Sacrifc. cap. 
2, ad fin.) remarks, that when Ca3cilius observed 
the statue of Serapis, ' Vt vulgus superstitiostcs 
solet, manum ori admovens, osculum labiis 
pressit ; according to the custom of the super- 
stitious vulgar, he moved his hand to his mouth, 
and kissed it with his lips.' 

The same act was used as a mark of respect 
in the presence of kings and persons high in office 
or station. Or rather, perhaps, the hand was not 
merely kissed and then withdrawn from the 
mouth, but held continuously before or upon the 
mouth, to which allusion is made in such texts 
as Judg. xviii. 10 ; Job xxi. 5 ; xxix. 9 ; xl. 4 ; 
Ps. xxxix. 9 ; in which ' laying the hand upon 
the mouth' is used to describe the highest degree 
of reverence and submission ; as such, this pos- 
ture is exhibited on the monuments of Persia 
and of Egypt. In one of the sculptures at 
Persepolis a king is seated on his throne, and 
before him a person standing in a bent posture, 
with his hand laid upon his mouth as he ad- 

dresses the sovereign (tig. 1). Exactly the same 
attitude is observed in the sculptures at Thebes, 
where one person, among several (in various pos- 
tures of respect) who appear before the scribes to 
be registered, has his hand placed thus submis- 
sively upon his mouth (fig. 2). The particular 
object of this act is said to have been to prevent 
the breath from reaching the face of the superior. 
But we are not to suppose that this was always 
its direct purpose, seeing that many acts which 
originally had a specific purpose, eventually be- 
came merely conventional marks of respect and 
homage under given circumstances. 

ADRA. [Auad.] 

ADRAMMELECH G?£T7N, 'A5pajueA.ex ) 
is mentioned, together with Anammelech, in 
2 Kings xvii. 31, as one of the idols whose 




worship the inhabitants of Sepharvaim established 
in Samaria, when theywere transferred thither by 
the king of Assyria, and whom they worshipped 
by the sacrifice of their children by fire. This 
constitutes the whole of our certain knowledge of 
this idol. With regard to the etymology of the 
name, the two most probable modes of interpreta- 
tion are those which assume, either that, as the 
latter half of the word is evidently Semitic, the 
former is so too, and that it means the magnificence 
of the king (and this is the view which Gesenius 
now favours) ; or, according to a suggestion first 
made by Reland (in his Dissertat. Miscell. ii. 
113), that the former member is Assyrian, and 
that the word means the king of fire. It is to 
be observed that, although it has been disputed 
to what family of languages the Assyrian be- 
longs, some modern scholars incline to consider 
it as Medo-Persian (Gesenius, Geschichte der 
Hebr. Sprache, p. 62), and that, in this case, the 
position of that member of the compound which 
would be dependent on the other as the genitive, 
is exactly the converse of that which is necessary 
in Hebrew and the other Syro- Arabian languages. 
As to the figure under which this idol was 
worshipped, the Babylonian Talmud (cited at 
length in Carpzov's Apparatus, p. 516) asserts 
that he was adored under that of a mule ; whereas 
Kimchi says it was under that of a, peacock; state- 
ments upon which little reliance can be placed. 
There is greater unanimity in the opinion that 
the power adored under this name was one of the 
heavenly bodies, in general accordance with the 
astrological character of the Assyrian idolatry 
(Gesenius, Jesaia, iii. 327, seq.). Selden (De 
Diis Syris, i. 6) and others have identified him 
with Moloch, chiefly on the ground that the 
sacrifice of children by fire, and the general sig- 
nification of the name, are the same in both. 
According, then, to the great difference of opinion 
concerning Moloch, authorities of nearly equal 
weight may be adduced for the opinion that 
Adrammelech represents the planet Saturn, or 
the Sun : the kind of sacrifice being the chief 
argument in favour of the former ; the etymology 
of the name being that in favour of the latter 

Selden has also maintained (JDeDiis Syris, ii. 9) 
that Adrammelech and Anammelech are only dif- 
ferent names of one and the same idol. The con- 
trary, however, is asserted by most ancient autho- 
rities, and by Hyde, Jurieu, Gesenius, and others, 
among the moderns. No argument for their 
identity can be drawn from the kethib, .in 
2 Kings xvii. 31, because the singular T\T7H 
is not found in prose prior to the Captivity (and, 
even if it were, it would be defectively written 
here, of which there is only one instance in our 
present text, unless when it has a prefix or suffix). 
Besides, upwards of seventy MSS. .and several 
early editions read the plural D" 1 i"PX in the 
text here (De Rossi, Var. Led. ad loc.) ; and it is 
also the keri of our printed copies. — J. N. 

2. ADRAMMELECH, one of the sons and 
murderers of Sennacherib, king of Assyria (2 
Kings xix. 27 ; Isa. xxxvii. 38). 

ADRAMYTTIUM f'ASpa^TTw), a sea-port 
town in the province of Mysia in Asia Minor, op- 
posite the isle of Lesbos, and an Athenian colony 
(Strabo, xiii. p.606 ; Herod, vii. 42). It is mentioned 
in Scripture only (Acts xxvii. 2) from the fact 

that the ship in which Paul embarked at Caesarea 
as a prisoner on his way to Italy, belonged to Adra- 
myttium. It was rare to find a vessel going direct 
from Palestine to Italy. The usual course tiiere- 
fore was to embark in some ship bound to one of 
the ports of Asia Minor, and there go on board 
a vessel sailing for Italy. . This was the course 
taken by the centurion who had charge of Paul. 
The ship of Adramyttium took them to Myra 
in Lycia, and here they embarked in an 
Alexandrian vessel bound for Italy. Some com- 
mentators (Hammond, Grotius, Witsius, &c.) 
strangely suppose that Adrametwm in Africa 
(Plin. v. 3 ; Ptol. iv. 3) was the port to which 
the ship belonged. Adramyttium is still called 
' Adramyt." 1 It is built on a hill, contains about 
1000 houses, and is still a place of some com- 
merce (Turner, Tour, iii. 265). 

ADRIATIC SEA ('ASpias, Acts xxvii. 27). 
This name is now confined to the gulf lying be- 
tween Italy on one side, and the coasts of Dal- 
matia and Albania on the other. But in St. 
Paul's time it extended to all that part of the 
Mediterranean between Crete and Sicily. Thus 
Ptolemy (iii. 16) says that Sicily was bounded 
on the east by the Adriatic, and that Crete 'was 
bounded by the Adriatic on the west ; and Strabo 
(ii. p. 1S5; vii. p. 488) says that the Ionian gulf was 
a part of what was in his time called the Adriatic 
Sea. This fact is of importance, as relieving us 
from the necessity of finding the island of Melita 
on which Paul was shipwrecked, in the present 
Adriatic gulf; and consequently removing the 
chief difficulty in the way of the identification of 
that island with the present Malta. To this use 
it has been skilfully applied by Dr. Falconer in 
his tractate On the Voyage of St. Paul. 

ADRIEL (^nny, the flock of God; Sept. 
'ASpL7]X), the person to whom Saul gave in 
marriage his daughter Merab, who had been ori- 
ginally promised to David (1 Sam. xviii. 19). 
Five sons sprung from this union, who were taken 
to make up the number of Saul's descendants, 
whose lives, on the principle of blood-revenge, were 
required by the Gibeonites to avenge the cruelties 
which Saul had exercised towards their race 
[Gibeonites]. In 2 Sam. xxh S, the name of 
Michal occurs as the mother of these sons of 
Adriel : but as it is known that Merab, and not 
Michal, was the wife of Adriel, and that Michal 
had never any children (2 Sam. vi. 23), there 
only remains the alternative of supposing either 
that Michal's name has been substituted for 
Merab's by some ancient copyist, or that the word 
which properly means bare (which Michal bare 
unto Adriel), should be rendered brought up or 
educated (which Michal brought up for Adriel). 
The last is the choice of our public version, and 
also of the Targum. The Jewish writers conclude 
that Merab died early, and that Michal adopted 
her sister's children, and brought them up for 
Adriel (T. Bab. Sanhed. fol. 19. 2). But, as the 
word ^^7 , will not easily take any other sense 
than ' she bare,'' the change of names seems the 
easier explanation. 

ADULLAM (O^Hfr? ; Sept. 'OSoXXa/j.), an 
old city (Gen. xxxviii. 1, 12, 20) in the plain 
country of the tribe of Judah (Josh. xv. 35), and 
one of the royal cities of the Canaanites (Josh. 


xii. 15). It was one of the towns which Rehoboam 
fortified (2 Cbron. xi. 7 ; Micah i. 15), and is men- 
tioned after the Captivity (Neh. xi. 30 ; 2 Mace. 
12, 38). Eusebius and Jerome state that it ex- 
isted in their time as a large village, ten miles to 
the east of Eleutheropolis ; but they follow, the 
Sept. in confounding it with Eglon (fpij?), 
whereas it is certain that, these were different 
places, and had distinct kings in the time of 
Joshua (xii. 12, 15). It is evident that Adullam 
was oneof the cities of 'the valley, 'or plain between 
the hill country of Judah and the sea ; and from 
its place in the lists of names (especially 2 Chron. 
xi. 8), it appears not to have been far from the 
Philistine city of Gath. This circumstance 
would suggest that the 'cave of Adullam' (1 Sam. 
xxii. 1), to which David withdrew immediately 
from Gath, was near the city of that name. But 
there is no passage of Scripture which connects 
the city and the cave, and it is certainly not in 
a plain that one would look for a cave capable 
of affording a secure retreat to 400 men ; nor 
has any such cave been found in that quarter. 
It is therefore far from improbable that the cave 
cf Adullam was in the mountainous wilderness 
in the west of Judah towards the Dead Sea, where 
such caves occur, and where the western names 
(as Carmel) are sometimes repeated. This con- 
jecture is favoured by the fact that the usual 
haunts of David were in this quarter ; whence 
he moved into the land of Moab, which was quite 
contiguous, whereas he must have crossed the 
whole breadth of the land, if the cave of Adullam 
had been near the city of that name. Other 
reasons occur which would take too much room 
to state : but the result is, that there appears at 
length good grounds for the local tradition which 
fixes the cave on the borders of the Dead Sea, 
although there is no certainty with regard to 
the particular cave usually pointed out. The 
cave so designated is at a point to which David 
was far more likely to summon his- parents, whom 
he intended to take from Bethlehem into Moab, 
than to any .place in the western plains. It is 
about six miles south-west of Bethlehem, in the 
side of a deep ravine (Wady Khureitun) which 
passes below the Frank mountain [Herodion] 
on the south. It is an immense natural cavern, 
the mouth of which can be approached only on 
foot along the side of the cliff. Irby and Man- 
gles, who visited it without being aware that it 
was the reputed cave of Adullam, state that it 
'runs in by a long winding, narrow passage, with 
small chambers or cavities on either side. We 
soon came to a large chamber with natural arches 
of great height ; from this last there were nu- 
merous passages, leading in all directions, occa- 
sionally joined by others at right angles, and 
forming a perfect labyrinth, which our guides as- 
sured us had never been perfectly explored, the 
people being afraid of losing themselves. The 
passages are generally four feet high by three feet 
wide, and were all on a level with each other. 
There were a few petrifactions where we were : 
nevertheless the grotto was perfectly clean, and 
the air pure and good' (Travels, pp. 340, 341). It 
seems probable that David, as a native of Beth- 
lehem, must have been well acquainted with this 
remarkable spot, and had probably often availed 
himself of its shelter when out with liis father's 
flocks. It would therefore naturally occur to 



him as a place of refuge when he fled from Gath ; 
and his purpose of forming a band of followers 
was much more likely to be realized here, in the 
neighbourhood of his native place, than in the 
westward plain, where the city of Adullam lay. 
These circumstances have considerable weight, 
when taken in connection with what has already 
been adduced ; but the question is one which 
there is no means of deciding with certainty. 

ADULTERY. In the common accejjtation of 
the word adultery denotes the sexual intercourse of 
a married woman with any other man than her 
husband, or of a married man with any other woman 
than his wife. But the crime is not understood in 
this extent among Eastern nations, nor was it so un- 
derstood by the Jews. With them, adultery was the 
act whereby any married man was exposed to the 
risk of having a spurious offspring imposed upon 
him. An adulterer was, therefore, any man who 
had illicit intercourse with a married or betrothed 
woman; and an adulteress was a betrothed or mar- 
ried woman who had intercourse with any other 
man than her husband. An intercourse between 
a married man and an unmarried woman was not, 
as with us, deemed adultery, but fornication — a 
great sin, but not, like adultery, involving the 
contingency of polluting a descent, of turning 
aside an inheritance, or of imposing upon a man 
a charge which did not belong to him. Adultery 
was thus considered a great social wrong, against 
which society protected itself by much severer 
penalties than attended an unchaste act not in- 
volving the same contingencies. 

It will be seen that this Oriental limitation of 
adultery is intimately connected with the exist- 
ence of polygamy. If adultery be defined as a 
breach of the marriage covenant, then, where the 
contract is between one man and one woman, as 
in Christian countries, the man as much as the 
woman infringes the covenant, or commits adul- 
tery, by every act of intercourse with any other 
woman: but where polygamy is allowed — where 
the husband may marry other wives, and take 
to himself concubines and slaves, the marriage 
contract cannot and does not convey to the woman 
a legal title that the man should belong to her 
alone. If, therefore, a Jew associated with a 
woman who was not his wife, his concubine, or 
his slave, he was guilty of unchastity, but com- 
mitted no offence which gave a wife reason to 
complain that her legal rights had been infringed. 
If, however, the woman with whom he associated 
was the wile of another, he was guilty of adultery 
— not by infringing his own marriage covenant, 
but by causing a breach of that which existed 
between that woman and her husband (Michaelis, 
Mosiiisches Rccht. art. 259; Jahn's Arc/iiiolor/ic, 
th. i. b. 2, § 183). By thus excluding from 'the 
name and punishment of adultery, the offence 
which did not involve the enormous wrong of 
imposing upon a man a supposititious offspring, in 
a nation where the succession to landed property 
went entirely by birth, so that a lather could not 
by his testament alienate it from any one who was 
regarded as his son — the law was enabled) with 
less severity than if the inferior offence had 
been included, to punish the crime with death. 
It is still so punished wherever the practice of 
polygamy has similarly operated in limiting the 
crime — not, perhaps, that the law expressly as- 
signs that punislvment, but it recognises the right 



of the injured party to inflict it, and, in fact, 
leaves it, in a great degree, in his hands. Now 
death was the punishment of adultery before the 
time of Moses ; and if he had assigned a less pu- 
nishment, his law would have been inoperative, 
for private vengeance, sanctioned by usage, would 
still have inflicted death. But by adopting it 
into the law, those restrictions were imposed upon 
its operation which necessarily arise when the calm 
inquiry of public justice is substituted for the im- 
pulsive action of excited hands. Thus, death would 
be less frequently inflicted ; and that this effect 
followed seems to be implied in the fact that the 
whole biblical history offers no example of capital 
punishment for the crime. Indeed, Lightfoot goes 
farther, and remarks, ' I do not remember that I 
have anywhere, in the Jewish Pandect, met with 
an example of a wife punished for adultery with 
death. There is mention ( T. Hieros. Sanhed. 242) 
of the daughter of a certain priest burned for 
committing fornication in her father's house ; but 
she was not married ' (Jlor. Hebr. ad Matt. xix. 8). 
Eventually, divorce superseded all other punish- 
ment. There are indeed some grounds for thinking 
that this had happened before the time of Christ, 
and we throw it out as a matter of inquiry, whe- 
ther the Scribes and Pharisees, in attempting to 
entrap Christ in the matter of the woman taken 
in adultery, did not intend to put him between 
the alternatives of either declaring for the revival 
of a practice which had already become obsolete, 
but which the law was supposed to command; 
or, of giving his sanction to the apparent infrac- 
tion of the law, which the substitution of divorce 
involved (Jolin viii. 1-11). In Matt. v. 32, Christ 
seems to assume that the practice of divorce for 
adultery already existed. In later times, it cer- 
tainly did; and Jews who were averse to part 
with their adulterous wives, were compelled to 
put them away (Maimon. in Gerushin, c. 2). In 
the passage just referred to, our Lord does not ap- 
pear to render divorce compulsory, even in case of 
adultery; he only permits it in that case alone, 
by forbidding it in every other. 

In the law which assigns the punishment of 
death to adultery (Lev. xx. 10), the mode in 
which that punishment should be inflicted is not 
specified, because it was known from custom. It 
was not, however, strangulation, as the Talmud- 
ists contend, but stoning, as we may learn 
from various passages of Scripture (e. g. Ezek. 
xvi. 38, 40 ; John viii. 5) ; and as, in fact, Moses 
himself testifies, if we compare Exod. xxxi. 14; 
xxxv. 2 ; with Num. xv. 35, 36. If the adulteress 
was a slave, the guilty parties were both scourged 
with a leathern whip (HIpJl), the number of 
blows not exceeding forty. In this instance the 
adulterer, in addition to the scourging, was suh- 
ject to the further penalty of bringing a trespass 
offering (a ram) to the door of the tabernacle, to 
be offered in his behalf by the priest (Lev. xix. 
20-22j. Those who wish to enter into the reasons 
of this distinction in favour of the slave, may con- 
sult Michaelis (Mosdisches Recht. art. 264). We 
only observe that the Moslem law, derived from 
old Arabian usage, only inflicts upon a slave, for 
this and other crimes, half the punishment in- 
curred by a free person. 

' It seems that the Roman law made the same 
important distinction with the Hebrew, -between 
the infidelity of the husband and of the wife. 


' Adultery ' was defined by the civilians to be the 
violation of another man's bed (yiolatio tori 
alieni); so that the infidelity of the husband 
could not constitute the offence. The more an- 
cient laws of Rome, which were very severe 
against the offence of the wife, were silent as to 
that of the husband. The offence was not capital 
until made so by Constantine, in imitation of the 
Jewish law; but under Leo and Marcian the 
penalty was abated to perpetual imprisonment, or 
cutting off the nose ; and, under Justinian, the 
further mitigation was granted to the woman, 
that she was only to be scourged, to lose her 
dower, and to be shut up in a convent. 

The punishment, of cutting off the nose brings 
to mind the passage in which the prophet Ezekiel 
(xxiii. 25), after, in the name of the Lord, reprov- 
ing Israel and Judah for their adulteries (i. e. 
idolatries) with the Assyrians and Chaldeans, 
threatens the punishment — ' they shall take away 
thy nose and thy ears,' which Jerome states was 
actually the punishment of adultery in those na- 
tions. One or both of these mutilations, most 
generally that of the nose, were also inflicted by 
other nations, as the Persians and Egyptians, and 
even the Romans ; but we suspect that among the 
former, as with the latter, it was less a judicial 
punishment than a summary infliction by the 
aggrieved party. It is more than once alluded to 
as such by the Roman poets : thus Martial asks, 

' Quis tibi persuasit nares abscindere mcecho?' 
and in Virgil (JE?i. vi. 496) we read — ■ 

' Ora, manusque ambas, populataque tempora 
Auribus, et truncas inhonesto vulnere nares.' 

It would also seem that these mutilations were 
more usually inflicted on the male than the 
female adulterer. In Egypt, however, cutting off 
the nose was the female punishment, and the man 
was beaten terribly with rods (Diod. Sic. i. 89, 
90). The respect with which the conjugal union 
was treated in that country in the earliest times 
is manifested in the history of Abraham (Gen. 
xii. 19). 

ADULTERY, TRIAL OF. It would be 
unjust to the spirit of the Mosaical legislation 
to suppose that the trial of the suspected wife 
by the bitter water, called the Water of Jea- 
lousy, was by it first produced. It is to be 
regarded as an attempt to mitigate the evils of, 
and to bring under legal control, an old custom 
which could not be entirely abrogated. The ori- 
ginal usage, which it was designed to mitigate, 
was probably of the kind which we still find in 
Western Africa ; and a comparison of the two may 
suggest the real points of the evil which the law 
of Moses was designed to rectify, and the real ad- 
vantages which it was calculated to secure. The 
matter deserves particular attention, inasmuch 
as it relates to the only ordeal in use among the 
Israelites, or sanctioned by their law. The illus- 
trative details of the Trial by Red Water, as it is 
called, vary among different nations, in minute 
particulars, which it would be tiresome to distin- 
guish. The substantial facts may be embodied 
in one statement: — 

The ordeal is, in some tribes, confined to the 
case of adultery, but in others it is used in all cases. 
Differences, rather than resemblances, must indi- 
cate the particular points in which the Mosaical 
law, while retaining the form, abandoned the sub- 


stance and obviated the evils of this institution. 
The differences are, in fact, all-important. In 
Africa the drink is poisonous, and calculated to pro- 
duce the effects which the oath imprecates; whereas 
the 'water of jealousy,' however unpleasant, was 
prepared in a prescribed manner, with ingredients 
known to all to be perfectly innocuous. It could not 
therefore injure the innocent; and its action upon 
the guilty must have resulted from the conscious- 
ness of having committed a horrible perjury, which 
crime, when the oath was so solemnly confirmed 
by the draught, and attended by such awful im- 
precations, was believed to be visitable with im- 
mediate death from heaven. It cannot be too 
strongly inculcated, that in the African examples 
the effect is not ascribed to the drink, but to a 
supernatural visitation upon a perjury which the 
confirmation of the oath-drink renders so awful. 
This name of 'oath-drink' is commonly applied 
to it on the Gold Coast. And it was, doubtless, 
to- strengthen such an impression that this awful 
drink, so much dreaded in Africa, was with the 
Jews exclusively appropriated to the only ordeal 
trial among them'. On the Gold Coast, the oath- 
drink (not, of course, poisonous) is used as a 
confirmation of all oaths, not only oaths of purga- 
tion, but of accusation, or even of obligation. In 
air cases it is accompanied with an imprecation 
that the Fetish may destroy them if they speak 
untruly, or do not perform the terms of their 
sbligation; and it is firmly believed that no one 
who is perjured under this form of oath will live 
an hour (Villault •, Bosnian). Doubtless the im- 
pression with respect to this more ordinary oath- 
drink is derived from observation of the effects 
attending the drink used in the actual ordeal ; 
and it is our object to show that the popular 
and general opinion regards such an oath as of 
so solemn a nature that perjury is sure to bring 
down immediate punishment. The red-water as 
an ordeal is confined to crimes of the worst class. 
These are murder, adultery, witchcraft. Perhaps 
this arises less from choice than from the fact that 
such crimes are not only the highest, but are the 
least capable of that direct proof for which the 
erdeal is intended as a substitute. A party is 
accused : if he denies the crime, he is required 
to drink the red water, and, on refusing, is deemed 
guilty of the offence. The trial is so much 
dreaded that innocent persons often confess them- 
selves guilty, in order to avoid it. And yet, 
the immediate effect is supposed to result less 
from the water itself than from the terrible oath 
with which it is drunk; for there are instances 
which show that the draught is the seal and sanc- 
tion of the most solemn oath which barbarous ima- 
ginations have been able to devise; and in kind it 
is the same — if we may be forgiven the familiar 
illustration — which is heard but too often in our 
own land, 'May this drink be my poison, if — .' So 
the person who drinks the red water invokes the 
Fetish to destroy him if he is really guilty 
of the offence with which he is charged. The 
drink is made by an infusion in water of pieces 
of a certain tree, or of herbs. It is highly 
poisonous in itself; and, if rightly prepared, the 
only chance of escape is the rejection of it by the 
stomach, in which case the party is deemed inno- 
cent; as he also is if, being retained, it has no 
sensible effect, which can only be the case when 
the priests (so to call them), who have the ma- 


nagement of the matter, are influenced by private 
considerations, or by reference to the probabilities 
of the case, to prepare the draught with a view to 
acquittal. The imprecations upon the accused if 
he be guilty, are repeated in an awful manner by 
the priests, and the effect is watched very keenly. 
If the party seems affected by the draught, like 
one intoxicated, and begins to foam at the mouth, 
he is considered undoubtedly guilty, and is slain 
on the spot ; or else he is left to the operation of 
the poisonous draught, which causes the belly to 
swell and burst, and occasions death (Barhot, 
p. 126; Bosman, p. 148; Artus r in De Bry, vi. 62; 
Villault, p. 191 ; Cony's Windward Coast, p. 71 ; 
Church Missionary Paper, No. 17 ; Davis's 
Journal, p. 24). 

The resemblances and the differences between 
this and the trial by bitter water, as described in 
Num. v. 11-31, will be apparent on comparison. 
The object, namely, to discover a crime incapable 
of being proved by evidence, is the same ; the oath, 
and a draught as its. sanction, are essentially the 
same ; and similar also are the effects upon the 
guilty. If, therefore, we suppose the pre-existing 
custom to have been analogous to that which has 
been described, similar practices may be produced 
from other quarters. Hesiod, in his Theogonia, re- 
ports that when a falsehood had been told by any 
of the gods, Jupiter was wont to send Iris to bring 
some water out of the river Styx in a golden 
vessel ; upon this an oath was taken, and if the god 
swore falsely, he remained for a whole year without 
life or motion. There was an ancient temple 
in Sicily, in which were two very deep basins, 
called Delli, always full of hot and sulphurous 
water, but never running over. Here the more 
solemn oatlis were taken; and perjuries were im- 
mediately punished most severely (Diod. Sic. xi. 
67). This is also mentioned by Aristotle, Silius 
Italicus, Virgil, and Macrobius ; and from the 
first it would seem that the oath was written upon 
a ticket and cast into the water. The ticket 
floated if the oath was true, and sunk if it was 
false. In the latter case the punishment which 
followed was considered as an act of Divine ven- 

The result of these views and illustrations will 
be, that the trial for suspected adultery by the bit- 
ter water amounted to this — that a woman sus- 
pected of adultery by her husband was allowed to 
repel the charge by a public oath of purgation, 
which oath was designedly made so solemn in it- 
self, and wao attended by such awful circum- 
stances, that it was in the highest degree unlikely 
that it would be dared by any woman not sup- 
ported by the consciousness of innocence. And 
the fact that no instance of the actual appli- 
cation of the ordeal occurs in Scripture, affords 
some countenance to the assertion of the Jewish 
writers — that the trial was so much dreaded hy 
the women, that those who were really guilty ge- 
nerally avoided it by confession ; and that thus 
the trial itself early fell into disuse. And if, as 
we have supposed, this mode of trial was only 
tolerated by Moses, the ultimate neglect of it 
must, have been desired and intended by him. In 
later times, indeed, it was disputed in the Jewish 
schools, whether the husband was bound to prose- 
cute his wife to this extremity, or whether it was 
not lawful for him to connive at and pardon her 
act, if he were so inclined. There were some who 




held that he was bound by his duty to prosecute, 
while others maintained that it was left to his 
pleasure (7 1 . Hieros. tit. Sotah, fol. 16, 2). 

From the same source we learn that this form 
of trial was finally abrogated about forty years 
before the destruction of Jerusalem. The reason 
assigned is, that the men themselves were at that 
time generally adulterous ; and that God would 
not fulfil the imprecations of the ordeal oath upon 
the wife while the husband was guilty of the 
same crime (John viii. 1-8). 

Adultery, in the symbolical language of the 
Old Testament, means idolatry and apostacy from 
the worship of the true God (Jer. iii. 8, 9 ; Ezek. 
xvi. 32 ; xxiii. 37 ; also Rev. ii. 22). Hence an 
Adulteress meant an apostate church or city, par- 
ticularly ' the daughter of Jerusalem,' or the 
Jewish church and people (Isa. i. 21 ; Jer. iii. 6, 
8, 9 ; Ezek. xvi. 22 ; xxiii. 7). This figure resulted 
from the primary one, which describes the con- 
nection between God and his separated people as 
a marriage between him and them. By an appli- 
cation of the same figure, ' An adulterous genera- 
tion ' (Matt. xii. 39 ; xvi. 4 ; Mark viii. 38) 
means a faithless and impious generation. 

ADUMMIM (fl*t?igj ; Sept. ' ASau/xiv ; va- 
rious readings are 'ASofifil/j. ,'Abo/j.fii, and °E5oj- 
/xifj.), a place which is only twice named in Scrip- 
ture. Once (Josh. xv. 7), where, from the context, 
it seems to indicate the border between Judah and 
Benjamin, and that it was an ascending road 
(ttfD*7S f6j?D) between Gilgal (and also Jeri- 
cho) and Jerusalem. The second notice (Josh, 
xviii. 17) adds no further information, but repeats 
' the ascent to Adummim.' Most commentators take 
the name to mean the place of blood (from the Heb. 
13*7), and follow Jerome, who finds the place in 
the dangerous or mountainous part of the road 
between Jerusalem and Jericho, and supposes that 
it was so called from the frequent effusion of 
blood by the robbers, by whom it was much infested. 
In Ins time it was called corruptly Mali domin ; 
in Greek, 'KvafSa ; in Latin, Ascensus rufforum, 
sive robentium. These are curious interpretations 
of the original word, which is most likely from 
D*7N, and merely denotes the redness of the soil 
or rock. It does not appear that any traveller 
mentions the geological aspect of the spot, and 
therefore this must be regarded only as a probable 
conjecture. However, as a difficult pass in a de- 
solate rocky region, between important cities, the 
part of the road indicated by Jerome, and all after 
him, was as likely to be infested by robbers in 
earlier times as in those of Jerome and at the pre- 
sent day. Indeed, the character of the road was so 
notorious, that Christ lays the scene of the parable 
of the good Samaritan (Luke x.) upon it ; and Je- 
rome informs us that Adummim or Adommim was 
believed to be the place where the traveller (taken 
as a real person) ' fell among thieves.' He adds 
that a fort and garrison was maintained here for 
the safeguard of travellers (Jerome, in Loc. Heb. 
Addomim, et in Epit. Paulas). The travellers 
of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries noticed 
the ruins of a castle, and supposed it the same as 
that mentioned by Jerome (Zuallart. iv. 30) ; but 
the judicious Nau (Voyage Nouveau de la Terre- 
Sainte, p. 349) perceived that this castle belonged 
to the time of the Crusades. Not far from this 
spot was a khan, called the ' Samaritan's khan ' 

(le Khdn du Samaritahi), in the belief that it 
was the 'inn' to which the Samaritan brought the 
wounded traveller. The travellers of the present 
century mention the spot and neighbourhood 
nearly in the same terms as those of older date ; 
and describe the ruins as those of ' a convent 
and a khan' (Hardy, 193). They all represent 
the road as still infested by robbers, from whom 
some of them (as Sir F. Henniker) have not 
escaped without danger. The place thus indi- 
cated is about eight miles from Jerusalem, and 
four from Jericho. 

ADVOCATE (UapdK\7iros), one who pleads the 
cause of another ; also one who exhorts, defends, 
comforts, prays for another. It is an appellation 
given to the Holy Spirit by Christ (John xiv. 16 ; 
xv. 26 ; xvi. 7), and to Christ himself by an 
apostle (1 John ii. 1 ; see also Rom. viii. 34 ; 
Heb. vii. 25). 

In the forensic sense, advocates or pleaders were 
not known to the Jews until they came under the 
dominion of the Romans, and were obliged to 
transact their law affairs after the Roman manner. 
Being then little conversant with the Roman 
laws, and with the forms of the jurists, it was ne- 
cessary for them, in pleading a cause before the 
Roman magistrates, to obtain the assistance of 
a Roman lawyer or advocate, who was well versed 
in the Greek and Latin languages (Otti Spicil. 
Crim. p. 325). In all the Roman provinces such 
men were found, who devoted their time and labour 
to the pleading of causes and the transacting of 
other legal business in the provincial courts (Lam- 
prid. Vit. Alex. Sev. c. 44). It also appears (Cic. 
pro Ccelio, c. 30) that many Roman youths who 
had devoted themselves to forensic business used 
to repair to the provinces with the consuls and 
praetors, in order, by managing the causes of the 
provincials, to fit themselves for more important 
ones at Rome. Such an advocate was Tertullus, 
whom the Jews employed to accuse Paul before 
Felix (Acts xxiv. 1) ; for although 'Vrjrwp, the 
term applied to him, signifies primarily an orator 
or speaker, yet it also denotes a pleader or advo- 
cate (Kuinoel, -Comment, and Bloomfield, Recens. 
S'i/nopt. ad Act. xxiv. 2) [Accuser]. 

ADYTUM, that which is inaccessible or im- 
penetrable ; and hence considered as descriptive 
of the holy of holies in the temple of Jerusalem, 
and of the innermost chambers, or penetralia, of 
other edifices accounted sacred, and of the secret 
places to which the priests only were admitted. 
It is used metaphorically by ecclesiastical writers, 
and employed to signify the heart and conscience 
of a man, and sometimes the deep, spiritual 
meaning of the Divine word. — H. S. 

^GYPT. [Egypt.] 

^LLA. CAPITOLINA. [Jerusalem.] 

^INON (JA\v&v, from ]])% fountain; Buxt. 
Lex. Ch. Bab. Talm. 1601), the name of a place 
near Salem, where John baptized (John iii. 23) ; 
the reason given, ' because there was much water 
there,' would suggest that he baptized at the 
springs from which the place took its name. On 
the situation of ^Enon nothing certain has been 
determined, although Eusebius places it eight 
Roman miles south of Scythopolis (Bethshan), 
and fifty-three north-east of Jesusalem. 

JEB.K. [Chronology.] 

^ETHIOPIA. [Ethiopia.] 


AFFINITY is relationship by marriage, as 
distinguished from consanguinity, which is rela- 
tionship by blood. Marriages between persons 
thus related, in various degrees, which previous 
usage, in different conditions of society, had al- 
lowed, were forbidden by the law of Moses. These 
degrees are enumerated in Lev. xviii. 7, sq. The 
examples before the law are those of Cain and 
Abel, who, as the necessity of the case required, 
married their own sisters. Abraham married 
Sarah, the daughter of his father by another wife : 
and Jacob married the two sisters Leah and 
Rachel. In the first instance, and even in the 
second, there was an obvious consanguinity, and 
only the last offered a previous relationship of 
affinity merely. So also, in the prohibition of the 
law, a consanguinity can be traced in what are 
usually set down as degrees of affinity merely. 
The degrees of real affinity interdicted are, that a 
man shall not (noi a woman in the correspond- 
ing relations) marry — 1. his father's widow (not 
his own mother) ; 2. the daughter of his lather's 
wife by another husband ; 3. the widow of his 
paternal uncle ; 4. nor his brother's widow if he 
has left children by her ; but, if not, he was 
bound to marry her to raise up cliildren to his 
deceased brother [Levirate Law]. The other 
restrictions are connected with the condition of 
polygamy, and they prohibit a man from having 
— 1. a mother and her daughter for wives at 
the same time ; 2. or two sisters for wives at 
the same time. These prohibitions, although 
founded in Oriental notions, adapted to a parti- 
cular condition of society, and connected with 
the peculiarities- of the Levitical marriage law, 
have been imported wholesale into our canon law. 
The fitness of this is doubted by many : but as, 
apart from any moral questions, the prohibited 
marriages are such as few would, in the present 
condition of European society, desire to contract, 
and such as would be deemed repugnant to good 
taste and correct manners, there is little real 
matter of regret in this adoption of the Levitical 
law. Indeed, the objections to this adoption have 
rested chiefly upon one point ; and that happens 
to be a point in which the law itself happens to 
have been egregiously misunderstood. This is in 
the injunction which, under permitted polygamy, 
forbade a man to have two sisters at once ; an in- 
junction which has been construed, under the 
Christian law, which allows but one wife, to apply 
equally to the case of a man marrying the sister 
of a deceased wife. The law itself, however, is so 
plain, that it is difficult to conceive how its true 
object — concerning which near] y all commentators 
are agreed — could have been thus interpreted. It 
is rendered in our version, ' Neither shalt thou 
take a wife to her sister, to vex her, to uncover 
'her nakedness, beside the other in her lifetime.'' 
Clear as this seems, it is still clearer if, with 
Gesenius and others, we take the word *Y"l¥, 
rendered to vex, to mean to rival, as in the 
Sept., Arabic, and Vulgate. The Targum of 
Jonathan, ttie Mislma, anil the celebrated Jewish 
commentators Jarchi and Ben Gerson, are satisfied 
that tioo sisters at once are intended ; and there 
seems an obvious design to prevent the occurrence 
of such unseemly jealousies and contentions be- 
tween sister-wives as embittered the life of Jacob 
— the father of the twelve tribes. The more 
recondite sense iias been extracted, with rather 



ungentle violence to the principles of Hebrew 
construction, by making ' vex her ' the antece- 
dent of ' in her lifetime,' instead of 5 take her 
sister to her, in her lifetime.' Under this view 
it is explained, that the married sister should 
not be ' vexed ' in her lifetime by the prospect 
that her sister might succeed her. It may be 
safely said that such an idea would never 
have occurred in the East, where unmarried 
sisters are far more rarely than in Europe brought 
into such acquaintance with the husband of the 
married sister as to give occasion for such ' vex- 
ation ' or ' rivalry ' as this. Yet, this view of 
the matter, which is completely exploded among 
sound biblical critics, has received the sanction of 
several Christian Councils {Concil. Illiber. can. 
61; Aurat. can. 17; Auxer. can. 30); and is 
rjerhaps not calculated to do much harm, ex- 
cept under peculiar circumstances, and except 
as it may prove a snare to some sincere but 
weak consciences. It may be remarked, that in 
those codes of law which most resemble that of 
Moses on the general subject, no prohibition of 
the marriage of two sisters in succession can be 

AFFIRMATIVES. Among the Jews the for- 
mula of assent or affirmation was fi^in j3 
cru eliras, thou hast said, or, thou hast rightly 
said. It is stated by Aryda and others that this 
is the prevailing mode in which a person expresses 
his assent, at this day, in Lebanon, especially 
when he does not wish to assert anything in ex- 
press terms. This explains the answer of our 
Saviour to the high-priest Caiaphas (Matt. xxvi. 
64), when he was asked whether he was the Christ, 
the son of God, and replied <rh eliras (see also 
Matt. xxvi. 25). Instances occur in the Talmud : 
thus, ' A certain man was asked, " Is Rabbi dead?" 
He answered, " Ye have said :" on which they 
rent their clothes' — taking it for granted from 
this answer that it was so (T. Hieros. Kilaiat, 
xxxii. 2). All readers even of translations are fa- 
miliar with a frequent elegancy of the Scriptures, or 
rather of the Hebrew language, in using an affirm- 
ative and negative together, by which the sense is 
^rendered more emphatic : sometimes the negative 
first, as Ps. cxviii. 17, ' I shall not die, but live,' 
&c; sometimes the negative first, aslsa. xxxvili. 1, 
' Thou shalt die, and not live.' In John i. 20, 
there is a remarkable instance of emphasis pro- 
duced by a negative being placed between two 
affirmatives— xal a>ixo\6-yria , e, ko.\ ouk Tipfficraro, 
Kal wfj.o\6y7]trti/ — ' And he confessed, and denied 
not, but confessed, I am not the Christ.' 

AFRICA. This ' quarter of the world' is not 
mentioned as such by any general name in Scrip- 
ture, although some of its regions are indicated. 
It is thought by some, however, that Africa, or as 
much of it as was then known, is denoted by ' the 
land of Ham ' in several of the Psalms. But we 
are inclined to think that the context rather re- 
stricts this designation to Egypt. "Whether Alma 
was really ' the land of Ham,' that is, was peopled 
by the descendants of Ham, is quite another 
question [Ham]. 

AGABUS ("Aya&os ; either from the Hebrew 
2jn, a locust, or 23JJ, to love), the name of 
' a prophet,' supposed to have been one of the 
seventy disciples of Christ. He, with others, 
came from Judaea to Antioch, while Paul and 



Barnabas (a.d. 43) were theve, and announced an 
approaching famine, which actually occurred the 
following year. Some writers suppose that the 
famine was general ; but most modern commen- 
tators unite in understanding that the large terms 
of the original,, "OKt)v tt]v o\Kovjj.ivr\v, apply not 
to the whole world, nor even to the whole Roman 
empire, but, as in Luke ii. 1, to Judsea only. 
Statements respecting four famines, which oc- 
curred in the reign of Claudius, are produced by 
the commentators who support this view ; and as 
all the countries put together would not make up 
a tenth part of even the Roman empire, they 
think it plain that the words must be understood 
to apply to that famine which, in the fourth year 
of Claudius, overspread Palestine. The poor 
Jews, in general, were then relieved by the Queen 
of Adiabene, who sent to purchase com in Egypt 
for them (Joseph. Antiq. xx. 2, 6) ; and for the 
relief of the Christians in that country contri- 
butions were raised by the brethren at Antioch, 
and conveyed to Jerusalem by Paul and Bar- 
nabas (Acts xi. 27-30). Many years after, this 
same Agabus met Paul at Caesarea, and warned 
him of the sufferings which awaited him if he 
prosecuted his journey to Jerusalem. 

AGAG (2JN ; Sept. 'Aydy), the name of 
two kings of the Amalekites, and perhaps a 
common name of all their kings, like Pharaoh 
in Egypt (comp. Num. xxiv. 7 ; 1 Sam. xv. 8, 9, 
20, 32). The first of these passages would imply 
that the king of the Amalekites was, then at least, 
a greater monarch, and his people a greater 
people, than is commonly imagined [Amale- 
kites]. The latter references are to that king 
of the Amalekites who was spared by Saul, con- 
trary to the solemn vow of devotement to de- 
struction, whereby the nation, as such, had of old 
precluded itself from giving any quarter to that 
people (Exod. xvii. 11 ; Num. xiv. 45). Hence, 
when Samuel arrived in the camp of Saul, he 
ordered Agag to be brought forth. He came 
' pleasantly,' deeming secure the life which the 
king had spared. But the prophet ordered him 
to be cut. in pieces ; and the expression which he 
employed — ' As thy sword hath made women, 
childless, so shall thy mother be childless among 
women' — indicates that, apart from the obliga- 
tions of the vow, some such example of retributive 
justice was intended, as had been exercised in the 
case of Adonibezek ; or, in other words, that Agag 
had made himself infamous by the same treat- 
ment of some prisoners of distinction (probably 
Israelites) as he now received from Samuel. The 
unusual mode in which his death was inflicted 
strongly supports this conclusion. 

AGAGITE, used as a Gentile name for Ama- 
lekite in Est. iii. 1, 10 ; viii. 3, 5. 

AGAPE, Agap2e (ayd-rcT), aydmai), the Greek 
term for love, used by ecclesiastical writers (most 
frequently in the plural) to signify the social 
W meal of the primitive Christians, which generally 
accompanied the Eucharist. Much learned re- 
search has been spent in tracing the origin of this 
custom ; but though considerable obscurity may 
rest en the details, the general historical connec- 
tion is tolerably obvious. It is true that the 
epavoi and eraipiai, and other similar institutions 
of Greece and Rome, presented some points of re- 
semblance which facilitated both the adoption and 


the abuse of the Agapae by the Gentile converts of 
Christianity; but we cannot consider them as the 
direct models of the latter. If we reflect on the 
profound impression which the transactions of 
' the .night on which the Lord was betrayed ' (1 
Cor. xi. 23) must have made on the minds of 
the apostles, nothing can be conceived more na- 
tural, or in closer accordance with the genius of 
the new dispensation, than a wish to perpetuate 
the commemoration of his death in connection 
with their social meal (Neander, Lehen Jesn, 
p. 643 ; History of the Planting, §c. of the Chris- 
tian Church, vol. i. 27, Edinb. 1842). The pri- 
mary celebration of the Eucharist had impressed 
a sacredness on, the previous repast (comp. icrOi- 
6vtcov avrwv, Matt. xxvi. 26 ; Mark xiv. 22, with 
/Aero, rb SziirvTJaai, Luke xxii. 20 ; 1 Cor. xi. 25) ; 
and when to this consideration we add the ardent 
faith and love of the new converts on the one hand, 
and the loss of property with the disruption of old 
connections and attachments on the other, which 
must have heightened the feeling of brotherhood, we 
need not look further to account for the institution of 
the Agapae, at once a symbol of Christian love and 
a striking exemplification of its benevolent energy. 
However soon its purity was soiled, at fbst it was 
not undeserving of the eulogy pronounced by the 
great orator of the church — '{Qos k<xXXi(Ttov iced 
XpriffLfJiUTarov kcu yap aydirris vir60ecns i)V, teal 
wevias irapa/xvOia, xal ttXovtov crocKppovio'iJ.os, Kal 
raireivocppocrwris SiSacrKaXia. ' A custom most 
beautiful and most beneficial ; for it was a sup- 
porter of love, a solace of poverty, a moderator of 
wealth, and a discipline of humility !' 

Thus the common meal and the Eucharist 
formed together one whole, and were conjointly 
denominated deiirvov rod Kvpiov, Selrrvov KvpiaKov, 
and aya-rnf]. They were also signified (according 
to Mosheim, Neander, and other eminent critics) 
by the phrases tcAuvres aprov (Acts ii. 46), Kkdais 
rod aprov (Acts ii. 42), K\d<Tai dprov (Acts xx. 
7). We find the term aydirai thus applied once, 
at least, in the New Testament (Jude 12), 
' These are spots in your feasts of charity ' («/ rats 
aydwais v/xav). The reading in 2 Pet. ii. 13, is 
of doubtful authority : ' Spots and blemishes, living, 
luxuriously in their Agapae ' (ivrpvtyaivres eV rals 
aydrcais avrcav) ; but the common reading iz t iy 
rals dirdraLS aurcov, ' in their own dectivings.' 
The phrase dyd.ixr\v iroielv was early employed in 
the sense of celebrating the Eucharist; thus in 
the epistle of Ignatius to the church at Smyrna 
(eKKArjcrlq rv ouffy iv 'S/xupvp), 5 viii. owe e£ov 
icrrlv xoipls rod i-KLtTuSiTOv, ovt€ jSaTrrl^eiy, oiire 
aydTT7)v 7rote?f. In § vii. dyairav appears to refer 
more especially to the Agapas. 

By ecclesiastical writers several synonymes are 
used for the Agapae, such as crv^irocna (Balsamon, 
ad Can. xxvii. Concil. Laodice?i.~) ; Koiml rpd-rre- 
£ai, evwxia, Koival karidaeis, KOiva. avfj.it6(na 
(Chrysostom) ; 8e?Trva uoivd (CEcumenius) ; o~vcr- 
ciria Kal crv/j.Tr6cna (Zonaras). 

Though the Agapae usually preceded the Eu- 
charist, yet they are not alluded to in Justin 
Martyr's description of the latter (Apol. i. § 65, 
67) ; while Tertullian, on the contrary, in his ac- 
count of the Agapae, makes no distinct mention of 
the Eucharist. ' The nature of our Cama," 1 he says, 
'may be gathered from its name, which is the 
Greek term for love (dilectio"). However much it 
may cost us, it is real gain to incur such expense 


in the cause of piety : for we aid the poor by this 
refreshment ; we do not sit down to it till we 
have first tasted of prayer to God {non prkts dis- 
cumbitur, quam oratio ad Deum prcegustetur') ; 
we eat to satisfy our hunger ; we drink no more 
than befits the temperate ; we feast as those who 
recollect that they are to spend the night in de- 
votion ; we converse as those who know that the 
Lord is an ear-witness. After water for washing 
hands, and lights have been brought in, every 
one is required to sing something to the praise 
of God, either from the Scriptures or from his own 
thoughts ; by this means, if any one has indulged 
in excess, he is detected. The feast is closed with 
prayer.' Contributions or oblations of provisions 
and money were made on these occasions, and the 
surplus was placed in the hands of the presiding 
elder (d trpozcrrks — compare 1 Tim. v. 17, ot 
irpoeaTciTes irpeo-^vrepoi), by whom it was ap- 
plied to the relief of orphans and widows, the sick 
and destitute, prisoners and strangers (Justin. 
Apol. i. 67). 

Allusions to the Kvptaichv SetTrvov are to be met 
with in heathen writers. Thus Pliny, in his cele- 
brated epistle to the emperor Trajan, after de- 
scribing the meeting of the Christians for worship, 
represents them as assembling again at a later 
hour, ' ad capiendum cibum, promiscuum tamen 
et innoxium.'' By the phrase ' cibum promiscuum ' 
(Augustine remarks)' we are not to understand 
merely food partaken in common with others, but 
common food, such as is usually eaten ; the term 
innoxium also intimates that it was perfectly 
wholesome and lawful, not consisting, for ex- 
ample, of human flesh (for, among other odious im- 
putations, that of cannibalism had been cast upon 
the Christians; which, to prejudiced minds, might 
derive some apparent support from a misinterpre- 
tation of our Lord's language in John vi. 53, ' Un- 
less ye eat the flesh and drink the blood of the Son 
of man '), nor of herbs prepared with incantations 
and magical rites. Lucian also, in his account 
of the philosopher Peregrinus, tells us that when 
imprisoned on the charge of being a Christian, he 
was visited by his brethren in the faith, who 
brought with them Se?Trya iroiKiXa, which is gene- 
rally understood to mean the provisions which 
were reserved for the absent members of the 
church at the celebration of the Lord's Supper. 
Gesner remarks, on this expression, ' Agapas, 
offer ente unoquoque aliquid, quod una consume- 
rent; hinc irouclAa, non a luxu." 1 

From the passages in the Epistles of Jude and 
Peter, already quoted, and more particularly 
from the language of Paul in 1 Cor. xi., it ap- 
pears that at a very early period the Agapae were 
perverted from their original design : the rich 
frequently practised a selfish indulgence, to the 
neglect of their poorer brethren : e/cacrros rb tSiov 
SuTrvov irpoXap.jia.vii (1 Cor. xi. 21); i.e. the rich 
feasted on the provisions they brought, without 
waiting for the poorer members, or granting them 
a portion of their abundance. They appear to 
have imitated the Grecian mode of entertainment 
called Sil-wyou airb airvpidos (see Xenophon's Me- 
morabilia, lii. 14; Neander's History of the 
Planting of the Christian Church, vol. i. (English 
transl.), p. 292). 

On account of these and similar irregularities, 
and probably in part to elude the notice of their 
persecutors, the Christians, about the middle of 



the second century, frequently celebrated the Eu- 
charist by itself and belbre daybreak (antelncanis 
ceetibus) (Tertullian, De Cor. Militis, § 3). From 
Pliny's Epistle it also appears that the Agapae 
were suspected by the Roman authorities of be- 
longing to the class of Hetaeriae (eraiplai), unions 
or secret societies, which were often employed for 
political purposes, and as such denounced by the 
imperial edicts; for he says (referring to the 
' cibum promiscuum,' &c.) ' quod ipsum facere 
desiisse post edictum meum, quo secundum man- 
data, tua Hetcerias esse vetueram ' (Plin. En. 96, 
al. 97). 

At a still later period the- Agapae were subjected 
to strict regulation by various councils. Thus 
by the 2Sth canon of the Council of Laodicea it 
was forbidden to hold them in churches : on ov 
de? ev rots Kvpiaico?s t) ev reus etcKArjtrlais ras 
Xeyo/xsvas aydiras -irote?v, koI ev t<£ o"mu> tov 
®eov eadieiv /ecu aKOvpLra (decubitus) arpavvveiv. 
At the Council of Carthage (a.d. 397) it was 
ordered (Can. 29) that none should partake of the 
Eucharist unless they had previously abstained 
from food : ' Ut sacramenta altaris nonnisi a 
j.jiiiiis hominibus celebrentur ;' but it is added, 
■ excepto uno die anniversario, quo ccena domini 
celebratur.' This exception favours the suppo- 
sition that the Agapae were originally held in 
close imitation of the Last Supper, i.e. before, 
instead of after, the Eucharist. The same prohi- 
bition was repeated in the sixth, seventh, and 
ninth centuries, at the Council of Orleans (Can. 
12), a.d. 533 ; in the Trullanian Council at Con- 
stantinople, a.d. 692 ; and in the council held at 
Aix-la-Chapelle, a.d. S16. Yet these regulations 
were not intended to set aside the Agapae alto- 
gether. In the Council of Gangra in Paphla- 
gonia (about a.d. 360) a curse was denounced 
(dvdde/xa ecrrco) on whoever despised the partakers 
of the Agapae or refused to join in them. When 
Christianity was introduced among the Anglo- 
Saxons by Austin (a.d. 596), Gregory the Great 
advised the celebration of the Agapae, in booths 
formed of the branches of trees, at the consecration 
of churches. 

Besides the Eucharistic Agapae, three other 
kinds are mentioned by ecclesiastical writers : 
X.Agapce natalities, held in commemoration of 
the martyrs (Theodoret, Evang. Verit. viii. pp. 923- 
92-1, edit. Schulz); 2. Agapce connubiales, or mar- 
riage-feasts (Greg. Naz. Epiist. i. 14) ; 3. Agapce 
funerales, funeral feasts (Greg. Naz. Carm. X.), 
probably similar to the TrepiSenrvoy or v eKpoSenr- 
vov of the Greeks. 

In modem times social meetings bearing a 
resemblance to the Agapae, and, in allusion 
to them, termed Love-feasts, have been regularly 
held by the Church of the United Brethren, or 
Moravians, and the "Wesleyan Methodists; also 
in Scotland, by the followers of Mr. Robert 

(The following works may be consulted : Hal- 
let's Notes and Discourses, vol. iii. disc. 6, 1736; 
Auguste, Ilandbucli der Chrisiliclien Archiiologie, 
Leipz. 1836-1S37 ; Gieseler, Lehxbwh der Kir- 
chengeschichtc, Bonn, 1831-1810 (this work has 
been translated in America, but is Dot yet com- 
pleted in the original) ; Neander, Allgoncine 
Geschichte, &c, Hamburg, 1S25-1S40; Drencher, 
De Veterum Christianorum Agapis, Giessae, 
1824; Brans, Canoncs Apostolorum ei ConciL 




iv.-vii., Berollni, 1839 ; Suiceri Tliesaurus, 
s. vv. ayanr], x\dcns-) — J- E. R. 

AGATE (12^ ; Sept. ax<W?; Vulg. achates'), 
a precious or rather ornamental stone, which was 
one of those in the pectoral of the high-priest 
(Exod. xxviii. 19 ; xxxix. 12). The word agate, in- 
deed, occurs also in Isa. liv. 12, and Ezek. xxvii. 
6, in our translation ; but in the original the word 
in these texts is altogether different, being "1313 
[Kadkod]. It seems not to have been questioned 
that some stone of the agate kind is intended. 
This stone is popularly known in this country 
under the name of Scotch pebble. Theophrastus 
describes the agate as ' an elegant stone, which 
took its name from the river Achates (now the 
Drillo in the Val di Noto) in Sicily, and was 
sold at a great price' (naXhs koI \i9os Kal 6 
'Ax^ttis <5 airb tov 'Axarov Trora/xov rov iv 
SuceAia Kal iraXeirai Tifxios, 58). This, no doubt, 
means that the stone was first found by the 
Greeks in the Achates. But it must have been 
known long before in the East ; and, in fact, there 
are few countries in which agates of some quality 
or other are not produced. The finest are those of 
India ; they are plentiful, and sometimes fine, in 
Italy, Spain, and Germany; but those found in 
this country are seldom good. 

We have no evidence that agates were found in 
Palestine. Those used in the desert were doubt- 
less brought from Egypt. Pliny says that those 
found in the neighbourhood of Thebes were usually 
red, veined with white. He adds that these, as 
well as most other agates, were deemed to be 
effectual against scorpions; and gives some curious 
accounts of the pictorial delineations which the 
variegations of agates occasionally assumed. Many 
such instances are produced by later authors. 
Agate is one of the numerous modifications of 
form under which silica presents itself, almost in 
a state of purity, forming 98 per cent, of the 
entire mineral. The siliceous particles are not so 
arranged as to produce the transparency of rock 
crystal, but a semi-pellucid, sometimes almost 
opaque substance, with a resinous or waxy frac- 
ture ; and the various shades of colour arise 
from minute quantities of iron. The same stone 
sometimes contains parts of different degrees of 
translueency, and of various shades of colour; and 
the endless combinations of these produce the 
beautiful and singular internal forms, from which, 
together with the high polish they are capable of 
receiving, agates acquire their value as precious 
stones. Agates are usually found in detached 
rounded nodules in that variety of the trap rocks 
called amygdaloid or mandelstein, and occasion- 
ally in other rocks. Some of the most marvellous 
specimens on record were probably merely fancied, 
and possibly some were the work of art, as it is 
known that agates may be artificially stained. 
From Pliny we learn that in his time agates were 
less valued than they had been in more ancient 
times (Hist. Nat. xxxvii. 10). The varieties of 
the agate are numerous, and are now, as in the 
time of Pliny, arranged according to the colour 
of their ground. The Scripture text shows the 
early use of this stone for engraving ; and several 
antique agates, engraved with exquisite beauty, 
are still preserved in the cabinets of the curious. 

AGE. [Chronology ; Eternity ; Gene- 
ration ; Longevity.] 


AGE, OLD. The strong desire of a protracted 
life, and the marked respect with which aged per- 
sons were treated among the Jews, are very often 
indicated in the Scriptures. The most striking 
instance which Job can give of the respect in 
which he was once held, is that even old men stood 
up as he passed them in the streets (Job xxix. 8) 7 
the force of which is illustrated by the injunction 
in the law, ' Before the hoary head thou shalt stand 
up, and shalt reverence the aged ' (Lev. xix. 30). 
Similar injunctions are repeated in the Apocrypha, 
so as to show the deportment expected from young 
men towards their seniors in company. Thus, in 
describing a feast, the author of Ecclesiasticus 
(xxxii. 3, 7) says, ' Speak thou that art the elder, 
for it becometh thee. Speak, young man, if there 
be need of thee, and yet scarcely, when thou art 
twice asked.' 

The attainment of old age is constantly pro- 
mised or described as a blessing (Gen. xv. 15 ; Job 
v. 26), and communities are represented as highly 
favoured in which old people abound (Isa.'lxv. 
20 ; Zech. viii. 4, 9), while premature death is de- 
nounced as the greatest of calamities to indivi- 
duals, and to the families to which they belong 
(1 Sam. ii. 32) ; the aged are constantly supposed 
to excel in understanding and judgment (Job xii. 
20 ; xv. 10 ; xxxii. 9 ; 1 Kings xii. 6, 8), and the 
mercilessness of the Chaldeans is expressed by 
their having ' no compassion ' upon the-' old man, 
or him who stooped for age' (2 Chron. xxxvi. 17). 

The strong desire to attain old age was necessa- 
rily in some degree connected with or resembled 
the respect paid to aged persons ; for people would 
scarcely desire to be old, were the aged neglected 
or regarded with mere sufferance. 

Michaelis, carrying out a hint of Montesquieu, 
fancies that veneration for old age is ' peculiarly 
suitable to a democrac}',' and, consequently, ' to 
the republican circumstances of the Israelites.' 
He adds, ' In a monarchy or aristocracy, it is 
birth and office alone which give rank. The 
more pure a democracy is, the more are all on an 
equal footing ; and those invested with authority 
are obliged to bear that equality in mind. Here 
great actions confer respect and honour; and the- 
right discharge of official duties, or the arrival of 
old age, are the only sources of rank. For how 
else can rank be established among those who have 
no official situation, and are by birth perfectly 
equal ' (Mos. Recht., art. cxl.). This is ingenious, 
and partly true. It would perhaps be wholly so, if, 
instead of connecting it with ' republican circum- 
stances,' the respect for age were rather regarded in 
connection with a certain state of society, short of 
high civilization, in which the sources of distinction, 
from whatever causes, are so limited, that room is 
left for the natural condition of age itself to be 
made a source of distinction. Of all marks of re- 
spect that to age is most willingly paid ; because 
every one who does homage to age, may himself, 
evntually, become an object of such homage. We 
almost invariably observe that where civilization 
advances, and where, in consequence, the claims 
to respect are multiplied, the respect for old age in 
itself, diminishes ; snd, like other conditions, it is 
estimated by the positive qualities which it exhibits. 
In the East, at present, this respect is mani- 
fested under every form of government. In the 
United States the aged are certainly not treated with 
more consideration than under the monarchical and 



aristocvatical governments of Europe. Professor 
C. Stowe (in Am. Bib. Repos.), who had unusual 
means of comparison, says they are there treated 
with less ; and this seems to prove satisfactorily, 
that it is rather the condition of civilization than 
the condition of government, which produces the 
greater or less respect for age. 

Attention to age was very general in an- 
cient times; and is still observed in all such 
conditions of society as those through which the 
Israelites passed. Among the Egyptians, the 
young men rose before the aged, and always 
yielded to them the first place (Herod, ii. 80). 
The youth of Sparta did the same, and were 
silent — or, as the Hebrews would say, laid their 
hand upon their mouth — ^whenever their elders 
spoke. At- Athens, and in other Greek states, old 
men were treated with corresponding respect. In 
China deference for the aged, and the honours 
and distinctions awarded to them, form a capital 
point in the government {Mem. sur Us Chinois, vol. 
i. p. 450) ; and among the Moslems of Western 
Asia, whose usages offer so many analogies to those 
of the Hebrews, the same regard for seniority is 
strongly shown. Among the Arabs, it is very 
seldom that a youth can be permitted to eat with 
men (Lane, Arabian Nights, c. xi. note 26). With 
the Turks, age, even between brothers, is the object 
of marked deference (Urquhart, Spirit of the 
East, ii. 471). 

In all such instances, which might be accumu- 
lated without number, we see the respect for age 
providentially implanted the most strongly in 
those states of social existence in which some 
such sentiment is necessary to secure for men of 
decayed physical" powers, that safety and exemp- 
tion from neglect, which are ensured to them in 
higher conditions of civilization by the general 
rather than the particular and exemptive operation 
of law and softened manners. 

AGMON (flttlN) occurs in Job xl. 21 ; 
xli. 2 ; Isa. ix. 14 ; xix. 15 ; lviii. 5 ; in the first 
of which vjassages it is translated in our authorized 
version by flag; in the second by hook; in the 
two next by rush ; and in the last by bulrush. As 
no plant is known under this name in the Hebrew 
or cognate languages, its nature has been sought 
for by tracing the word to its root, and by judging 
of its nature from the context. Thus D3X agom 
is said to mean a lake or pool of water, also a 

reed; and in Arabic *V^-l, pronounced ijam, 

is translated reed-bed, cane-bed. Agom is also 
considered to be derived from the same root as 
N7D3 goma, the papyrus. Some have even 
concluded that both names indicate the same 
thing, and have translated them by juncus, or 

Celsius is of opinion that in all the above pas- 
sages agmon should be translated by arundo, or 
reed. Dr. Harris (art. ' Reed ') lias suggested that 
in Job xli. 2, instead of ' Canst thou put an hook 
into his nose,' we should read ' Canst thou tie up 
his mouth with a rush rope," 1 as had previously 
been suggested by others (Celsius, Hiero-Bot. 
vol. i. 467) ; and that in ver. 20 we should read 
' out of his nostrils goeth smoke, and the rushes 
are kindled before it,' instead of 'as out of a 
seething pot or caldron/ as in the authorized ver- 



Lobo, in his Voyage d Abyssinie, speaking of 
the Red Sea, says, ' Nous ne l'avons pas jamais 
vue rouge, que dans les lieux ou il y a beaucoup de 
Gouemon.' ' II y a beaucoup de cette herbe dans 
la Mer rouge.' What this herb is does not else- 
where appear. Forskal applies the name of 
ghobeibe to a species of arundo, which he consi- 
dered closely allied to A. phragmites, the plant 
which Celsius conceived to be the agmon of Scrip- 
ture. M. Bove, in his Voyage Botanique en 
Egypte, observed, especially on the borders of the 
Nile, quantities of Saccharum cegyptiacum and of 
Arundo esgyptiaca, which is, perhaps, only a va- 
riety of A. donaz, the cultivated Spanish or Cyprus 
reed, or, as it is usually called in the south of 
Europe, Canna and Cana. In the neighbourhood of 
Cairo he found Poa cynosuroides (the koosha, or 
cusa, or sacred grass of the Hindoos), which, he 
says, serves ' aux habitans pour faire des cordes, 
chauffer leurs fours, et cuire des briques et pote- 
ries. Le Saccharum cylindricum est employe 
aux memes usages.' The Egyptian species of 
arundo is probably the A. isiaca of Delile, which is 
closely allied to A. phragmites, and its uses may 
be supposed to be very similar to those of the latter. 
This species is often raised to the rank of a genus 
under the name of phragmites, so named from 
being employed for making partitions, &c. It is 
about six feet high, with annual stems, and is 
abundant about the banks of pools and rivers, and 
in marshes. The panicle of flowers is very large, 
much subdivided, a little drooping and waving in 
the wind. The plant is used for thatching, making 
screens, garden fences, &c. ; when split it is made 
into string, mats, and matches. It is the gemeine 
rohr of the Germans, and the Canna or Cana 
palustre of the Italians and Spaniards. 

Any of the species of reed here enumerated will 
suit the different passages in which the word 
agmon occurs ; but several species of saccharum, 
growing to a great size in moist situations, and 
reed-like in appearance, will also fulfil all the 
conditions required, as affording shelter for the 
behemoth or hippopotamus, being convertible into 
ropes, forming a contrast with their hollow stems 
to the solidity and strength of the branches of 
trees, and when dry easily set on fire : and when 
in flower their light and feathery inflorescence 
may be bent down by the slightest wind that 
blows.— J. F. R. 

AGONY {'Ayoivia), a word generally denoting 
contest, and especially the contests by wrestling, 
&c. in the public games ; whence it is applied 
metaphorically to a severe struggle or conflict 
with pain and suffering. Agony is the actual 
straggle with present evil, and is thus distin- 
guished from anguish, which arises from the re- 
flection on evil that is past. In the New Testa- 
ment the word is only used by Luke(xx. 44), and 
is employed by him with terrible significance lo 
describe the fearful struggle which our Lord sus- 
tained in the garden of Gethsemane. The cir- 
cumstances of this mysterious transaction are 
recorded in Matt. xxvi. 36-16 ; Mark xiv. 32-42; 
Luke xx. 3'J-IS ; Heb. v. 7, S. None of these 
passages, taken separately, contains a full history 
of our Saviour's agony. Each of (he three Kvan- 
gelists has omitted some particulars which the 
others have recorded, and all are very brief. The 
passage in Hebrews is only an incidental notice. 
The three Evangelists appear to have had the 




same design, namely, to convey to their readers 
an idea of the intensity of the Lord's distress ; but 
they compass it in different ways." Luke alone 
notices the agony, the bloody sweat, and the 
appearance of an angel from heaven strengthening 
him. Matthew and Mark alone record the change 
which appeared in his countenance and manner, 
the complaint which he uttered of the over- 
powering sorrows of his soul, and his repetition of 
the same prayer. All agree that he prayed for 
the removal of what he called ' this cup,' and are 
careful to note that he qualified this earnest pe- 
tition by a preference of his Father's will to his 

All the circumstances of this wonderful mental 
conflict have been minutely and ably examined 
by Dr. Lewis Mayer, of New York, in the Am. 
Bib. Repository for April, 1841. We are necessi- 
tated to confine our attention to the most essential 
points, the cause and nature of this agony. 

Jesus himself intimates the cause of his over- 
whelming distress in the prayer, ' If it be possible, 
let this, cup pass from me ;' the cup which his 
Father had appointed for him ; and the question 
is, what does he mean by ' this cup.' Doddridge 
and others think that he means the instant agony, 
the trouble that he then actually endured. But 
this is solidly answered by Dr. Mayer, who shows, 
by reference to John xviii. 18, that the cup re- 
specting which he prayed was one that was then 
before him, which he had not yet taken up to 
drink, and which he desired, if possible, that the 
Father should remove. It could, therefore, be no 
other than the scene of suffering upon which he 
was about to enter. It was the death which the 
Father had appointed for him — the death of the 
cross - with all the attending circumstances which 
aggravated its horror ; that scene of woe which 
began with his arrest in the garden, and was 
consummated by his death on Calvary. Jesus 
had long been familiar with this prospect, and 
had looked to it as the appointed termination of 
his ministry (Matt. xvi. 21; xvii. 9-12; xx. 17, 
19, 28 ; Mark x. 32-34 ; John x. 18 ; xii. 32, 33). 
But when he looked forward to this destination, 
as the hour approached, a chill of horror some- 
times came over him, and found expression in 
external signs of distress (John xii. 27 ; comp. 
Luke xii. 49, 50). But on no occasion did he 
exhibit any very striking evidence of perplexity 
or anguish. He was usually calm and collected; 
and if at any time he gave utterance to feelings 
of distress and horror, he still preserved his self- 
possession, and quickly checked the desire which 
nature put forth to be spared so dreadful a death. 
It is, therefore, hardly to be supposed that the 
near approach of his sufferings, awful as they 
were, apart from everything else, could alone 
have wrought so great a change in the mind of 
Jesus and in his whole demeanour, as soon as he 
had entered the garden. It is manifest that 
something more than the cross was now before 
him, and that he was now placed in a new and 
hitherto untried situation. Dr. Mayer says : ' I 
have no hesitation in believing that he was here 
put upon the trial of his obedience. It was the 
purpose of God to subject the obedience of Jesus 
to a severe ordeal, in order that, like gold tried 
in the furnace, it might be an act of more perfect 
and illustrious virtue ; and for this end he per- 
mitted him to be assailed by the fiercest tempta- 

tion to disobey his will and to refuse the ap- 
pointed cup. In pursuance of this purpose, the 
mind of Jesus was left to pass under a dark 
cloud, his views lost their clearness, the Father's 
will was shrouded in obscurity, the cross appeared 
in ten-fold horror, and nature was left to indulge 
her feelings, and to put forth her reluctance.' 

Dr. Mayer admits that the sacred writers 
have not explained what that was, connected in 
the mind of Jesus with the death of the cross, 
which at this time excited in him so distressing a 
fear. ' Pious and holy men have looked calmly 
upon death in its most terrific forms. But the 
pious and holy man has not had a world's sal- 
vation laid upon him ; he has not been required 
to be absolutely perfect before God ; he has 
known that, if he sinned, there was an advocate 
and a ransom for him. But nothing of this con- 
solation could be presented to the mind of Jesus. 
He knew that he must die, as he had lived, with- 
out sin ; but if the extremity of suffering should 
so far prevail as to provoke him into impatience 
or murmuring, or into a desire for revenge, this 
would be sin; and if he sinned, all would be 
lost, for there was no other Saviour. In such 
considerations may probably be found the remote 
source of the agonies and fears which deepened 
the gloom of that dreadful night.' Under another 
head [Bloody Sweat] will be found the con- 
siderations suggested by one of the remarkable 
circumstances of this event. 

AGORA ('Ayopa), a word of frequent occur- 
rence in the New Testament: it denotes generally 
any place of public resort in towns and cities 
where the people came together ; and hence more 
specially it signifies, 1. A public place, a broad 
street, &c, as in Matt. xi. 16; xx. 3; xxiii. 7; 
Mark vi. 56; xii. 38; Luke vii. 32; xi. 43; 
xx. 46. 2. A forum or market-place, where 
goods were exposed for sale, and assemblies or 
public trials held, as in Acts xvi. 19 ; xvii. 17. 
In Mark vii. 4, it is doubtful whether ayopa. 
denotes the market itself, or is put for that which 
is brought from the market ; but the known cus- 
toms of the Jews suggest a preference of the former 

AGORAIOS ('Ayopauos), a Greek word signi- 
fying the things belonging to, or persons fre- 
quenting, the Agora. In Acts xix. 38, it is 
applied to the days on which public trials were 
held in the forum ; and in cli. xvii. 5, it denotes 
idlers, or persons lounging about in the markets 
and other places of public resort. There is a 
peculiar force in this application of the word, 
when we recollect that the market-places or ba- 
zaars of the East were, and are at this day, the 
constant resort of unoccupied people, the idle, and 
the newsmongers. 

AGRAMMATOS CAypd^aTos), a Greek 
word meaning unlearned, illiterate. In Acts iv. 
13, the Jewish literati apply the term to Peter 
and John, in the same sense in whicjj they 
asked, with regard to our Lord himself, ' How 
knoweth this man letters, having never learned' 
(John vii. 15). In neither case did they mean 
to say that they had been altogether without 
the benefits of the common education, which con- 
sisted in reading and writing, and in an acquaint- 
ance with the sacred books ; but that they were 
not learned men, had not sat at the feet of any 
of the great doctors of the law, and had not been 




instructed in the mysteries and refinements of 
their peculiar learning and literature. 

AGRARIAN LAW. To this, or some such 
heading, belongs the consideration of the peculiar 
laws by which the distribution and tenure of land 
were regulated among the Hebrews ; while the 
modes in which the land was cultivated belong to 

It has been the custom to regard the Hebrews 
as a pastoral people until they were settled in Pa- 
lestine. In a great degree they doubtless were 
so ; and when they entered agricultural Egypt, the 
land of Goshen was assigned to them expressly 
because that locality was suited to their pas- 
toral habits (Gen. xlvii. 4-6). These habits were 
substantially maintained ; but it is certain that 
they became acquainted with the Egyptian pro- 
cesses of culture ; and it is more than probable 
that they raised for themselves such products 
of the soil as they required for their own use. 
We may, indeed, collect that the portion of 
their territory which lay in the immediate vi- 
cinity of the Nile was placed by them under 
culture (Deut. xi. 10), while the interior, with the 
free pastures of the desert beyond their immediate 
territory, sufficed abundantly for their cattle 
(1 Chron. vii. 21). This partial attention to 
agriculture was in some degree a preparation for 
the condition of cultivators, into which they were 
destined eventually to pass. While the Israelites 
remained in a state of subjection in Egypt, 
the maintenance of their condition as shepherds 
was highly instrumental in keeping them distinct 
and separate from the Egyptians, who were agri- 
culturists, and had a strong dislike to pastoral 
habits (Gen. xlvi. 34). But when they became 
an independent and sovereign nation, their sepa- 
ration from other nations was to be promoted 
by inducing them to devote their chief attention 
to the culture of the soil. A large number 
of the institutions given to them had this object 
of separation in view. Among these, those re- 
lating to agriculture— forming the agrarian law 
of the Hebrew' people — were of the first import- 
ance. They might not alone have been suffi- 
cient to secure the end in view ; but no others 
could have been effectual without them ; for, with- 
out such attention to agriculture as would render 
them a self-subsisting nation, a greater degree of 
intercourse with the neighbouring and idolatrous 
nations must have been maintained than was con- 
sistent with the primary object of the Mosaical in- 
stitutions. The commonest observation suffices 
to show how much less than others agricultural 
communities are open to external influences, and 
how much less disposed to cultivate intercourse 
with strangers. 

It was, doubtless, in subservience to this oh- 
ject, and to facilitate the change, that the Israel- 
ites were put in possession of a countiy already in 
a state of high cultivation (Deut. vi. 1 1). And 
it was in order to retain them in this condition, to 
give them a vital interest in it, and to make it a 
source of happiness to them, that a very peculiar 
agrarian law was given to them. In stating this 
law, and in declaring it to have been in the highest 
degree wise and salutary, regard must be had 
to its peculiar object with reference to the segrega- 
tion of the Hebrew people: for there are points in 
which this and other Mosaical laws were unsuited 
to general use, some by the very circumstances 

which adapted them so admirably to their special 
object. When the Israelites were numbered just 
before their entrance into the land of Canaan, and 
were found (exclusive of the Levites) to exceed 
600,000 men, the Lord said to Moses : ' Unto 
these the land shall be divided for an inheritance, 
according to the number of names. To many 
thou shalt give the more inheritance, and to the 
few thou shalt give the less inheritance ; to every 
one shall his inheritance be given according to 
those that were numbered of him. Notwith- 
standing the land shall be divided by lot : ac- 
cording to the names of the tribes of their fathers 
shall they inherit' (Num. xxvi. 33-54). This 
equal distribution of the soil was the basis of the 
agrarian law. By it provision was made for the 
support of 600,000 yeomanry, with (according to 
different calculations) from sixteen to twenty-five 
acres of land to each. This land they held inde- 
pendent of all temporal superiors, by direct tenure, 
from Jehovah their sovereign, by whose power 
they were to acquire the territory, and under 
whose protection they were to enjoy and retain it. 
' The land shall not be sold for ever, for the land 
is mine, saith the Lord : ye are strangers and 
sojourners with me' (Lev. xxv. 23). Thus the 
basis of the constitution was an equal agrarian 
law. But this law was guarded by other provi- 
sions equally wise and salutary. The accumula- 
tion of debt was prevented, first, by prohibiting 
every Hebrew from accepting of interest from 
any of his fellow-citizens (Lev. xxv. 35, 36J ; next, 
by establishing a regular discharge of debts every 
seventh year; and, finally, by ordering that no 
lands could be alienated for ever, but must, on 
each year of Jubilee, or every seventh Sabbatic 
year, revert to the families which originally pos- 
sessed them. Thus, without absolutely depriving 
individuals of all temporary dominion over their 
landed property, it re-established, every fiftieth year, 
that original and equal distribution of it, which 
was the foundation of the national polity ; and as 
the period of this reversion was fixed and regular, 
all parties had due notice of the terms on which 
they negotiated ; so that there was no ground for 
public commotion or private complaint. 

This law, by which landed property was re- 
leased in the year of Jubilee from all existing obli- 
gations, did not extend to houses in towns, which, 
if not redeemed within one year after being sold, 
were alienated for ever (Lev. xv. 29, 30). This 
must have given to property in the countiy a de- 
cided advantage over property in cities, and must 
have greatly contributed to the essential object 
of all these regulations, by affording an induce- 
ment to every Hebrew to reside on and culti- 
vate his land. Further, the original distribution 
of the land was to the several tribes according to 
their families, so that each tribe was, so to speak, 
settled in the same county, and each family in 
the same barony or hundred. Nor was the estate 
of any family in one tribe permitted to pass into 
another, even by the marriage of an heiress (Num. 
xxvii.) ; so that not only was the original balance 
of property preserved, but the closest and dearest 
connections of affinity attached to each other the 
inhabitants of every vicinage. 

It often happens that laws in appearance simi- 
lar have in view entirely different objects. In 
Europe the entailment of estates in the direct line 
is desiiyned to encourage the formation of large 



properties. . In Israel the effect was entirely dif- 
ferent, as the entail extended to all the small 
estates into which the land was originally divided, 
bo that they could not legally be united to form 
a large property, and then entailed upon the de- 
scendants of him by whom the property was 
formed. This division of the land in small estates 
among the people, who were to retain them in 
perpetuity, was eminently suited to the leading 
objects of the Hebrew institutions. It is allowed 
on all hands that such a condition of landed pro- 
perty is in the highest degree favourable to high 
cultivation, and to increase of population, while it 
is less favourable to pasturage. The two first were 
objects which the law had in view, and it did not 
intend to afford undue encouragement to the 
pastoral life, while the large pastures of the adja- 
cent deserts and of the commons secured the coun- 
try against such a scarcity of cattle as the di- 
vision of the land into small heritages has already 
produced in France. 

For this land a kind of quit-rent was payable 
to the sovereign proprietor, in the form of a tenth 
or tithe of the produce, which was assigned to the 
priesthood [Tithes]. The condition of military 
service was also attached to the lanu, as it ap- 
pears that every freeholder (Deut. xx. 5) was 
obliged to attend at the general muster of the 
national army, and to serve in it, at his own ex- 
pense (often more than repaid by the plunder), as 
long as the occasion required. In this direction, 
therefore, the agrarian law operated in securing a 
body of 600,000 men, inured to labour and in- 
dustry, always assumed to be ready, as they were 
bound, to come forward at their country's call. 
This great body of national yeomamy, every one 
of whom had an important stake in the national 
independence, was ofliceied by its own hereditary 
chiefs, heads of tribes and families (comp. Exod. 
xviii. and Num. xxxi. 14); and must have pre- 
sented an insuperable obstacle to treacherous am- 
bition and political intrigue, and to every attempt 
to overthrow the Hebrew commonwealth and esta- 
blish despotic power. Nor were these institutions 
less wisely adapted to secure the state against 
foreign violence, and at the same time prevent offen- 
sive wars and remote conquests. For while this 
vast body of hardy yeomanry were always ready 
to defend their country, when assailed by foreign 
foes, yet, being constantly employed in agriculture, 
attached to domestic life, and enjoying at home 
the society of the numerous relatives who peopled 
their neighbourhood, war must have been in a 
high degree alien to their tastes and habits. Re- 
ligion also took part in preventing them from 
being captivated by the splendour of military 
glory. On returning from battle, even if vic- 
torious, in order to bring them back to more 
peaceful feelings after the rage of war, the law re- 
quired them to consider themselves as polluted by 
the slaughter, and unworthy of appearing in the 
camp of Jehovah until they had employed an en- 
tire day in the rites of purification (Num. xix. 
13-16; xxxi. 19). Besides, the force was en- 
tirely infantry ; the law forbidding even the kings 
to multiply horses in their train (Deut. xvii. 16); 
and this, with the ordinance requiring the attend- 
ance of all the males three times every year at 
Jerusalem, proved the intention of the legislator 
to confine the natives within the limits of the 
Promised Land, and rendered long and distant 

wars and conquests impossible without the virtual 
renunciation of that religion which was incorpo- 
rated with their whole civil polity, and which was, 
in fact, the charter by which they held their pro 
perty and enjoyed all their rights (Graves's Lec- 
tures on the Pentateuch, lect. iv. ; Lowman's Civil 
Gov. of the Heb. c. iii. iv. ; Michaelis, Mos. 
Recht, i. 240, sqq.). 

AGRICULTURE. The antiquity of agricul- 
ture is indicated in the brief history of Cain and 
Abel, when it tells us that the former was a ' tiller 
of the ground,' and brought some of the fruits of 
his labour as an offering to God (Gen. iv. 2, 3), 
and that part of the ultimate curse upon him was : 
' when thou tillest the ground, it shall not hence- 
forth yield to thee her strength' (iv. 12). Of the 
actual state of agriculture before the deluge we 
know nothing. It must have been modified con- 
siderably by the conditions of soil and climate, 
which are supposed by many to have undergone 
some material alterations at the flood. Whatever 
knowledge was possessed by the old world was 
doubtless transmitted to the new by Noah and 
his sons ; and that this knowledge was consider- 
able is implied in the fact that one of the opera- 
tions of Noah, when he ' began to be a husband- 
man,' was to plant a vineyard, and to make wine 
with the fruit (Gen. ix. 2). There are few agri- 
cultural notices belonging to the patriarchal pe- 
riod, but they suffice to show that the land of 
Canaan was in a state of cultivation, and that 
the inhabitants possessed what were at a later date 
the principal products of the soil in the same 
country. It is reasonable therefore to conclude 
that the modes of operation were then similar to 
those which we afterwards find among the Jews 
in the same country, and concerning which our 
information is more exact. 

In giving to the Israelites possession of a country 
already under cultivation, it was the Divine inten- 
tion that they should keep up that cultivation, 
and become themselves an agricultural people; 
and in doing this they doubtless adopted the prac- 
tices of agriculture which they found already esta- 
blished in the country. This may have been the 
more necessary, as agriculture is a practical art; 
and those of the Hebrews who were acquainted 
with the practices of Egyptian husbandry had 
died in the wilderness ; and even had they lived, 
the processes proper to a hot climate and alluvial 
soil, watered by river inundation, like that of 
Egypt, although the same in essential forms, could 
not have been altogether applicable to so different 
a country as Palestine. 

As the nature of the seasons lies at the root of 
all agricultural operations, it should be noticed 
that the variations of sunshine and rain r which 
with us extend throughout the year, are in Pales- 
tine confined chiefly to the latter part of autumn 
and the winter. During all the rest of the year 
the sky is almost uninterruptedly cloudless, and 
rain very rarely falls. The autumnal rains usu- 
ally commence at the latter end of October or 
beginning of November, not suddenly, but by de- 
grees, which gives opportunity to the husbandman 
to sow his wheat and barley. Tire rains continue 
during November and December, but afterwards 
they occur at longer intervals ; and rain is rare 
after March, and almost never occurs as late as 
May. The cold of winter is not severe ; and as 
the ground is never frozen, the labours of the hus- 


Landman are not entirely interrupted. Snow falls 
in different parts of the country, but never lies 
long on the ground. In the plains and valleys 
the heat of summer is oppressive, but not in the 
more elevated tracts. In these high grounds the 
nights are cool, often with heavy dew. The total 
absence of rain in summer soon destroys the ver- 
dure of the fields, and give3 to the general land- 
scape, even in the high country, an aspect of 
drought and barrenness. No green thing remains 
but the foliage of the scattered fruit-trees, and oc- 
casional vineyards and fields of millet. In autumn 
the whole land becomes dry and parched ; the 
cisterns are nearly empty ; and all nature, animate 
and inanimate, looks forward with longing for the 
return of the rainy season. In the hill country 
the time of harvest is later than in the plains of 
the Jordan and of the sea-coast. The barley har- 
vest is about a fortnight earlier than that of wheat. 
In the plain of the Jordan the wheat harvest is 
early in May ; in the plains of the coast and of 
Esdraelon, it is towards the latter end of that 
month ; and in the hills, not until June. The 
general vintage is in September, but the first 
grapes ripen in July ; and from that time the 
towns are well supplied with this fruit (Robinson, 
Biblical Researches, ii. 96-100). 

Soil, <SfC. — The geological characters of the soil 
in Palestine have never been satisfactorily stated ; 
but the different epithets of description which tra- 
vellers employ, enable us to know that it differs 
considerably, both in its appearance and character, 
in different parts of the land ;. but wherever soil 
of any kind exists, even to a very slight depth, it 
is found to be highly fertile. As parts of Palestine 
are hilly, and as hills have seldom much depth of 
soil, the mode of cultivating them in terraces was 
anciently, and is now, much employed. A series 
of low stone walls, one above another, across the 
face of the hill, arrest the soil brought down by 
the rains, and afford a series of levels for the 
operations of the husbandman. This mode of cul- 
tivation is usual in Lebanon, and is not unfre- 
quent in Palestine, where the remains of terraces 
across the hills, in various parts of the country, 
attest the extent to which it was anciently carried. 
This terrace cultivation has necessarily increased 
or declined with the population. If the people 
were so few that the valleys afforded sufficient food 
for them, the more difficult culture of the hills 
was neglected ; but when the population was too 
large for the valleys to satisfy with bread, then the 
hills were laid under cultivation. 

In such a climate as that of Palestine, water is 
the great fertilizing agent. The rains of autumn 
and winter, and the dews of spring, suffice for the 
ordinary objects of agriculture ; but the ancient 
inhabitants were able, in some parts, to avert even 
the aridity which the summer droughts occasioned, 
and to keep up a garden-like verdure, by means of 
aqueducts communicating with the brooks and 
rivers (Ps. i. 3; lxv. 10; Prov. xxi. 1 ; Isa. xxx. 
25; xxxii, 2, '20 ; Hos. xii. 11). Hence springs, 
fountains, and rivulets were as much esteemed by 
husbandmen as by shepherds (Josh. xv. 19; Judg. 
i. 15). The soil was also cleared of stones, and 
carefully cultivated; and its fertility was in 
creased by the ashes to which the dry stubble and 
herbage were occasionally reduced by being burned 
over tie surface of the ground (Prov. xxi v. ;i 1 ; Isa. 
via. 'I'd ; xxxii. 13). Dung, and, in the l.eighbour- 



hood of Jerusalem, the blood of animals, were also 
used to enrich the soil (2 Kings ix. 37 ; Ps. lxxxiii. 
10 ; Isa. xxv. 10 ; Jer. ix. 22 ; Luke xiv. 34, 35). 
That the soil might not be exhausted, it was 
ordered that every seventh year should be a sabbath 
of rest to the land : there was then to be no sowing 
or reaping, no pruning of vines or olives, no vintage 
or gathering of fruits ; and whatever grew of itself 
was to be left to the poor, the stranger, and the 
beasts of the field (Lev. xxv. 1-7 ; Deut. xv. 1-10). 
But such an observance required more faith than 
the Israelites were prepared to exercise. It was for 
a long time utterly neglected (Lev. xxvi. 34, 35 ; 
2 Chron. xxxvi. 21), but after the Captivity it was 
more observed. By this remarkable institution 
the Hebrews were also trained to habits of economy 
and foresight, and invited to exercise a large de- 
gree of trust in the bountiful providence of their 
Divine King. 

Fields. — Under the term pT dagan, which 
we translate ' grain ' and ' corn,' the Hebrews 
comprehended almost every object of 'field cultuie. 
Syria, including Palestine, was regarded by the 
ancients as one of the first countries for corn 
(Pliny, Hist. Nat. xviii. 7). Wheat was abun- 
dant and excellent ; and there is still one bearded 
sort, the ear of which is three times as heavy, and 
contains twice as many grains, as our common 
English wheat (Irby and Mangles, p. 472). Bar- 
ley was also much cultivated, not only for bread, 
but because it was the only kind of coin which 
was given to beasts ; for oats and rye do not grow 
in warm climates. Hay was not in use ; ' and 
therefore the barley was mixed with chopped straw 
to form the food of cattle (Gen. xxiv. 25, 32 ; 
Judg. xix. 19, &c.^ Other kinds of field culture 
were millet, spelt, various species of beans and peas, 
pepperworf, cummin, cucumbers, melons, llax, 
and, perhaps, cotton. Many other articles might 
be mentioned as being now cultivated in Palestine ; 
but, as their names do not occur in Scripture, it is 
difficult to know whether they were grown there in 
ancient times, or not. 

Anciently, as now, in Palestine and the East 
the arable lands were not divided into fields by 
hedges, as in this country. The ripening products 
therefore presented an expanse of cultuie un- 
broken, although perhaps variegated, in a large 
view, by the difference of the products grown. The 
boundaries of lands were therefore marked by 
stones as landmarks, which, even in patriarchal 
times, it was deemed a heinous wrong to remove 
(Job xxiv. 2) ; and the law pronounced a curse 
upon those who, without authority, removed them 
(Deut. xix. 14; xxvii. 17). The walls and hedges 
which are occasionally mentioned in Scripture be- 
longed to orchards, gardens, and vineyards. 

Agricultural Operations. — Of late years 
much light has been thrown upon the agri- 



cultural operations and implements of ancient 
times, by the discovery of various representations 
on the sculptured monuments and painted tombs 
of Egypt. As these agree surprisingly with the 
notices in the Bible, and, indeed, difl'er little from 
what we find employed in Syria and Egypt, it is 
very safe to receive them as guides on the present 

Ploughing. — This has always been a light and 
superficial operation in the East. At first, the 
ground was opened with pointed sticks ; then, a 
kind of hoe was employed ; and this, in many 
parts of the world, is still used as a substitute for 

the plough. But the plough was known in Egypt 
and Syria before the Hebrews became cultivators 
(Job i. 14). In the East, however, it has always 
been a light and inartificial implement. At first, 
It was little more than a stout branch of a tree, 
from which projected another limb, shortened and 
pointed. This, being turned into the ground, 
made the furrow ; while at the farther end of the 
larger branch was fastened a transverse yoke, to 
which the oxen were harnessed. Afterwards a 
handle to guide the plough was added. Thus 
the plough consisted of— 1. the pole; 2. the point 
or share; 3. the handle; 4. the yoke. The Syrian 
plough is, and doubtless was, light enough for a 
man to carry in his hand (Russell's Nat. Hist, of 
Aleppo, i. 73). We annex a figure of the ancient 
Egyptian plough, which had the most resemblance 

to the one now used (as figured in p. 89), and trie 
< omparison between them will probably suggest 
p fair idea of the plough which was in use among 
the Hebrews. The following cut (from Mr. Fel- 
lowes' work on Asia Minor) shows the parts of a 

1. The plough. 
4. Handle. 

2. The pole. 
5. Yokes. 

3. Shares (various). 
6. Ox-goad. 

ferent shares according to the work it has to 

The plough was drawn by oxen, which were 
sometimes urged by a scourge (Isa. x. 26 ; Na- 
hum iii. 2) ; but cftener by a long staff, fur- 
nished at one end with a fiat piece of metal for 
clearing the plough, and at the other with a spike 
for goading the oxen. This ox-goad might be 
easily used as a spear (Judg. iii. 31 ; 1 Sam. 
xiii. 21). Sometimes men followed the plough 
with hoes to break the clods (Isa. xxviii. 24) ; 
but in later times a kind of harrow was em- 
ployed, which appears to have been then, as now, 
merely a thick block of wood, pressed down by a 
weight, or by a man sitting on it, and drawn over 
the ploughed field. 

Sowing. — The ground, having been ploughed 
as soon as the autumnal rains had mollified the 
soil, was fit, by the end of October, to receive the 
seed ; and the sowing of wheat continued, in dif- 
ferent situations, through November into December. 
Barley was not generally sown till January and 
February. The seed appears to have been sown 
and harrowed at the same time ; although some- 
times it was ploughed in by a cross furrow. 

still lighter plough used in Asia Minor and 
Syria, with but a single handle, and with dif- 

Tloughing in the Seed. — The Egyptian paintings 
illustrate the Scriptures by showing that in those 
soils which needed no previous preparation by 
the hoe (for breaking the clods) the sower followed 
the plough, holding in the left hand a basket of 
seed, which he scattered with the right hand, 
while another person filled a fresh basket. We 
also see that the mode of sowing was what we call 
' broad- cast,' in which the seed is thrown loosely 
over the field (Matt. xiii. 3-8). In Egypt, when 
the levels were low, and the water had continued 
long upon the land, they often dispensed with the 
plough altogether ; and probably, like the present 
inhabitants, broke up the ground with hoes, or 
simply dragged the moist mud with bushes after 
the seed had been thrown upon the surface. To 
this cultivation without ploughing Moses probably 
alludes (Deut. xi. 10), when he tells the Hebrews 
that the land to which they were going was not 
like the. land of Egypt, where they ' sowed their 
seed and watered it with their foot as a garden of 
herbs.'' It seems however that even in Syria, in 
sandy soils, they sow without ploughing, and then 
plough down the seed (Russell's JV. II. of Aleppo, 
i. 73, &c). It does not appear that any instrument 
resembling our hat-row was known ; the word ren- 
dered to harrow, in Job xxxix. 10, means literally 




to break the clods, and is so rendered in Isa. xxviii. 
21 ; Hos. x. 11 : and for this purpose the means 
used have been already indicated. The passage 
in Job, however, is important. It shows that this 
breaking of the clods was not always by the hand, 
but that some kind of instrument was drawn by 
an animal over the ploughed field, most probably 
the rough log which is still in use. 

Harvest. — It lias been already mentioned that 
the time of the wheat harvest in Palestine varies, 
in different situations, from early in May to late 
in June ; and that the barley harvest is about a 
fortnight earlier than that of wheat. Among the 
Israelites, as with all other people, the harvest was 
a season of joy, and as such is more than once al- 
luded to in Scripture (Ps. cxxvi. 5 ; Isa. ix. 13). 

Reaping. — Different modes of reaping are in- 
dicated in Scripture, and illustrated by the Egyp- 
tian monuments. In the most ancient times, the 
corn was plucked up by the roots, which continued 

to be the practice with particular kinds of grain 
after the sickle was known. In Egypt, at this day, 
barley and dourra are pulled up by the roots. The 
choice between these modes of operation was pro- 
bably determined, in Palestine, by the considera- 
tion pointed out by Russell {N. H. of Aleppo, i. 
74), who states that ' wheat, as well as barley in 
general, does not grow half as high as in Britain ; 
and is therefore, like other grain, not reaped with 
the sickle, but plucked up by the roots with the 
hand. In other parts of the country, where the 
com grows ranker, the sickle is used. 1 When the 
sickle was used, the wheat was either crojiped off 
under the ear or cut close to the ground. In the 
former case, the straw was afterwards plucked up 

cal of straw, they generally followed the former 
method ; while the Israelites, whose lands derived 
benefit from the burnt stubble, used the latter ; al- 
though the practice of cutting off the ears was also 

for use ; in the latter, the stubble was left and 
burnt on the ground for manure. As the Egyp- 
tians needed not such manure, and were economi- 

known to them (Job xxiv. 24). Cropping the 
ears short, the Egyptians did not generally bind 
them into sheaves, but removed them in baskets. 
Sometimes, however, they bound them into double 
sheaves ; and such as they plucked up were, bound 
into single long sheaves. The Israelites appear 
generally to have made up their com into sheaves 
(Gen. xxxvii. 7 ; Lev. xxiii. 10-15 ; Ruth ii. 7, 
15 ; Job xxiv. 10; Jer. ix. 22; Mich. iv. 12), 
which were collected into a heap, or removed in a 
cart (Amos ii. 13) to the threshing-floor. The 
carts were probably similar to those which are 
still employed for the same purpose. The sheaves 
were never made up into shocks, as with us, al- 
though the word occurs in our translation of Judg. 
xv. 5 ; Job v. 26 ; for the original term signifies 
neither a shock composed of a few sheaves stand- 
ing temporarily in the field, nor a stack of many 
sheaves in the home yard, properly thatched, to 
stand for a length of time ; but a heap of sheaves 
laid loosely together, in order to be trodden out as 
quickly as possible, in the same way as is done in 
the East at the present day (Brown, Antiq. of the 
Jeios, ii. 591). 

With regard to sickles, tnere appear to have 
been two kinds, indicated by the .different names 
chermesh (K>0"in) and meggol (730) ; and as 
the former occurs only in the Pentateuch (Deut. 
xvi. 9 ; xxiii. 20), and the latter only in the Pro- 
phets (Jer. ii. 16 ; Joel i. 17), it would seem that 
the one was the earlier and the other the later in- 
strument. But as we observe two very dif- 
ferent kinds of sickles in use among the Egypt ians, 
not only at the same time, but in the same field 
(see the cut, p. 92), it may have been so with the 
Jews also. The figures of these Egyptian sickles 
probably mark the difference between them. One 
was very much like our common reaping-AooA:, 
while the other had more resemblance in its shape 
to a scythe, and in the Egyptian examples appears 
to have been toothed. This last is probably the 
same as the Hebrew meggol, which is indeed ren- 
dered by scythe in the margin of Jer. 1. 16. The 
reapers were the owners and their children, men- 



was one of the stated provisions for the poor : and 
for their benefit the comers of the field were left 
umeaped, and the reapers might not return for a 
fbrgo.tfceri sheaf. The gleaners, however, were to 
obtain in the first place the express permission 
oi'the proprietor or Ms steward (Lev. xix. 9, 10 ; 
Deut. xxiv. 19 ; Ruth ii. 2, 7). 


Threshing. — The ancient mode of threshing, as 
described in Scripture and figured on the Egyptian 
monuments, is still preserved in Palestine. For- 
merly the sheaves were conveyed from the field to 
the threshing-floor in carts ; but now they are 
borne, generally, on the backs of camels and asses. 
The threshing-floor is a level plot of ground, of a 
circular shape, generally about fifty feet in dia- 
meter, prepared for use by beating down the earth 
till a hard floor is formed (Gen. 1. 10 ; Judg. vi. 
37 ; 2 Sam. xxiv. 16, 24). Sometimes several of 
these floors are contiguous to each other. The 
sheaves are spread out upon them ; and the grain 
is trodden out by oxen, cows, and young cattle, 
arranged five abreast, and driven in a circle, or 
rather in all directions, over the floor. This was the 
common mode in the Bible times ; and Moses for- 
bade that the oxen thus employed should be muz- 
zled to prevent them from tasting the corn (Deut. 
xxv. 4 ; Isa. xxviii. 28). Flails, or sticks, were 
only used in threshing small quantities, or for the 
tighter kinds of grain (Ruth ii. 17; Isa. xxviii. 
27). There were, however, some kinds of thresh- 


ing-m a chines, which are still used in Palestine 
and Egypt. One of them, represented in the an- 
nexed figure, is very much used in Palestine. It 

servants and women-servants, and day-labourers 
(Ruth ii. 4, 6, 21, 23; John iv. 36; James v. 4). 
Refreshments were provided for them, especially 
drink, of which the gleaners were allowed to par- 
take (Ruth ii. 9). So in the Egyptian harvest- 
scenes, we perceive a provision of water in skins, 
hung against trees, or in jars upon stands, with 
the reapers drinking, and gleaners applying to 
share the draught. Among the Israelites, gleaning 

is composed of two thick planks, fastened together 
side by side, and bent upwards in front. Sharp 
fragments of stone are fixed into holes bored in 
the bottom. This machine is drawn over the corn 
by oxen — a man or boy sometimes sitting on it to 
increase the weight. It not only separates the 
grain, but cuts the straw and makes it fit for fod- 
der (2 Kings xiii. 7). This is, most probably, the 
• Charutz V*!*)!"!, or ' corn-drag, 1 which is men- 
tioned in Scripture (Isa. xxviii. 27 ; xli. 15 ; 
Amos i. 3, rendered ' threshing instrument '), and 
would seem to have been sometimes furnished with 
iron points instead of stones. The Bible also no- 
tices a machine called a Moreg, JTlO (2 Sam. 
xxiv. 22; 1 Chron. xxi. 23 ; Isa. xli. 15), which 
is unquestionably the same which bears in Arabic 

the name of ~- . y> Noreg. This is explained by 

Freytag (from the Kamoos Lex.) by — ' tribulum, 
instrumentum, quo fruges in area tentatur (i?i 
Syria), sive ferreum, sive ligneum.' This ma- 
chine is not now often seen in Palestine ; but is 
more used in some parts of Syria, and is common 
in Egypt. It is a sort of frame of wood, in which 
are inserted three wooden rollers, armed with iron 
teeth, &c. It bears a sort of seat or chair, in which 
the driver sits to give the benefit of his weight. It 
is generally drawn over the corn by two oxen, and 
separates the grain, and breaks up the straw even 
more effectually than the drag. In all these 
processes, the com is occasionally turned by a 
fork ; and, when sufficiently threshed, is thrown 
up by the same fork against the wind to separate 
the grain, which is then gathered up and win- 

Winnowing. — This was generally accomplished 
by repeating the process of tossing up the grain 
against the wind with a fork (Jer. iv. 11, 12), by 
which the broken straw and chaff were dispersed 
while the grain fell to the ground. The grain af- 
terwards passed through a sieve to separate the bits 
of earth and other impurities. After this, it un- 
derwent a still further purification, by being tossed 
up with wooden scoops or short-handed shovels. 




such as we see in Egyptian paintings (Isa. xxx. 
24 ; Jahn, Biblisches Archciologie, b. i. ch. i. leap. 
4 ; Winer, Biblisches Realworterbuch, s. v. ' Ac- 
kerbau ;' Paulsen, Ackerbau d. Morgenlander ; 
Surenhusius, Mischna, part i. ; Ugolini, De Re 
Rustica Vett. Hebrccorum, in Thesaurus, t. xxix. ; 
Norberg, De Agricult. Orientali, in Opusc. Acad. 
iii. ; Reynier, De V Economic Publique et Rurale 
desArabes et des Juifs ; Brown, Antiquities of the 
Jews ; Robinson, Biblical Researches in Palestine ; 
Wilkinson, Ancient Egyptians ; Description de 
VEgypte, Antiquites, and Etat Moderne ; Rosel- 
lini, Monumenti delV Egitto. Inforrnation re- 
specting the actual products and agriculture of 
Palestine, collected from numerous travellers, 
may be seen in Kitto's Pictorial History of Pales- 
tine, Physical History, ' History of the Months.') 

AGRIELAIA ('AypieAaia; New Test, dypie- 
Aaios). The wild olive-tree is mentioned by 
St. Paul i/i Romans xi. 17, 24. Here different 
opinions have been entertained, not only with 
respect to the plant, but also with respect to the 
explanation of the metaphor. One great difficulty 
has arisen from the same name' having been 
applied to different plants. Thus by Dioscorides 
(De Mater. Med. i. 137) it is stated that the 
'AypieAaia, or wild olive-tree, is by some called 
Cotinus, and by others, the Ethiopic olive. So, in 
the notes' to Theoph. ed Boda Stapel, p. 224, we 
read, ' Sed hie kotivos lego cum Athenao, id est 
oleaster. Est vero alius cotinus, frutex, de quo 
Plinius, xvi. 18. Est et in Apennino frutex qui 
vocatur Cotinus, ad liheamenta modo conchylii 
colore insignis.' Hence the wild olive-tree has 
been confounded with rhus cotinus, or Venetian 
sumach, with which it has no point of resem- 
blance. Further confusion has arisen from the 
present Elaagnus angustifolia of botanists having 
been at one time called Olea sylvestris. Hence it 
has been inferred that the 'AypieAaia is this very 
Eleagnus, E. angustifolia, or the narrow-leaved 
Oleaster-tree of Paradise of the Portuguese. In 
many points it certainly somewhat resembles the 
true olive-tree — that is, in the form and appearance 
of the leaves, in the oblong-shaped fruit (edible 
in some of the species), also in an oil being 
expressed from the kernels; but it will not explain 
the present passage, as no process of grafting will 
enable the El.xagnus to bear olives of any kind. 

If we examine a little further the account given 
by Dioscorides of the 'AypieAaia, we find in i. 141, 
Tlepl Saxpvov eAalas AlQioiriKrjs, that our olives 
and wild olives exude (cars — that is, a gum or 
resin,' like the Ethiopic olive. Here it is im- 
portant to remark that, the wild olive of (he 
Grecians is distinguished from the wild olive of 

Ethiopia. What plant the latter may be, it is 
not perhaps easy to determine with certainty ; but 
Arabian authors translate the name by zait-al- 
Soudan, or the olive of Ethiopia. Other synonymes 
for it are louz-al-bur, or wild almond ; and badam 
Jcohee, i. e. mountain almond. Under the last name 
the writer has obtained the kernels of the apricot in 
Northern India, and it is given in Persian works 
as one of the synonymes of the bar-kookh, or apri- 
cot, which was originally called apricock and 
prsecocia, no doubt from the Arabic bur-kookh. 
The apricot is extensively cultivated in the Hi- 
malayas, chiefly on account of the clear beautiful 
oil yielded by its kernels, on which account 
it might well be compared with the olive-tree. 
But it does not serve better than the Elasagnus to 
explain the passage of St. Paul. 

From the account of Dioscorides, however, it is 
clear that the Ethiopic was. distinguished from 
the wild, and this from the cultivated olive ; and 
as the plant was well known both to the Greeks 
and Romans, there was no danger of mistaking it 
for any other plant except itself in a wild state, 
that is, the true 'AypieAaia, Oleaster, or Olea 
europisa, in a wild state. That this is the very 
plant alluded to by the Apostle seems to he 
proved from its having been the practice of the 
ancients to graft the wild upon the cultivated 
olive tree. Thus Pliny (Hist. Nat. xvii. IS) says, 
' Africae peculiare quidem in oleastro est inserere. 
Quadam astemitate consenescunt proxima adop- 
tioni virga emissa, atque ita alia arbore ex eadem 
juvenescente : iteramque et quoties opus sit, ut 
sevis eadem oliveta constent. Inseritur autem 
oleaster calamo, et inoculatione.' In the ' Pic- 
torial Bible ' this practice has already been ad- 
duced as explaining the text; and Theophrastus 
and Columella (De Re Rust. v. 9) also refer to 
it. The apostle, therefore, in comparing the Ro- 
mans to the wild oKve tree grafted on a cultivated 
stock, made use of language which was most in- 
telligible, and referred to a practice with which 
they must have been perfectly familiar. — J. F. R. 

AGRIPPA [Herodian Family]. Although 
of the two Herods, father and son, who also bore the 
name of Agrippa, the latter is best known by his 
Roman name, it seems proper to include him with 
the other members of the Herodian dynasty, under 
the name which he bore among his own people. 

AGUR p-UN), the author of the sayings 
contained in Prov. xxx., winch the inscription 
describes as composed of the precepts delivered 
by 'Agur, the son of Jakeh,' to his friends ' Ithiel 
and Ucal.' Beyond this everything that has been 
stated of him, and of the time in which he lived, 
is pure conjecture. Some writers have regarded 
the name as an appellative, but differ as to its 
signification. The Vulgate has ' Verba Congre- 
gantis filii Vomentis. 1 Most of the fathers think 
that Solomon himself is designated under this 
name ; and if the word is to be understood as 
an appellative, it may be as well to look for its 
meaning in the Syriac, where, according to Bar 

Bahlul, in Castell. JJQ^J means qui sapicntice 

stttdiis so applicat. The Septuagint omits the 
chapter ascribed to Agur, as well as the nine fust 
verses of the following chapter. 

AH (PIN, brother) or rather Acii, is frequently 
found, according to the inadequate representation 




of the guttural which is followed in our Version, 
as the first sj-llable of compound Hebrew proper 
names. The observations already offered in the 
article Ab may be referred to for some illustration 
of the metaphorical use of the term brother in 
such combinations, as well as for the law of their 
construction, whenever the two members are nouns 
of which one is dependent as a genitive on the 
other.— J. N. 

AHAB (3NnN, father's brother; Sept. 
'Axaa/3), son of Omri, and the sixth king of 
Israel, who reigned twenty-one years, from B.C. 
91S to 897. Ahab was, upon the whole, the 
weakest of all the Israelitish monarchs ; and 
although there are occasional traits of character 
which show that he was not without good feelings 
and dispositions, the history of his reign proves 
that weakness of character in a king may some- 
times be as injurious in its effects as wickedness. 
Many of the evils of his reign may be ascribed to 
the close connection which he formed with the 
Phoenicians. There had long been a beneficial 
commercial intercourse between that people and the 
Jews; and the relations arising thence were very 
close in the times of David and Solomon. After 
the separation of the kingdoms, the connection 
appears to have been continued by the nearer 
kingdom of Israel, but to have been nearly, if not 
quite, abandoned by that of Judah. The wife of 
Ahab was Jezebel, the daughter of Ethbaal, or 
Ithobaal, king of Tyre. She was a woman of 
a decided and energetic character, and, as such, 
soon established that influence over her husband 
which such women always acquire over weak, and 
not unfrequently also over strong, men. Ahab, 
being entirely under the control of Jezebel, sanc- 
tioned the introduction, and eventually established 
the worship of the Phoenician idols, and especially 
of the sun-god Baal. Hitherto the golden calves 
in Dan and Bethel had been the only objects of 
idolatrous worship in Israel, and they were in- 
tended as symbols of Jehovah. But all reserve 
and limitation were now abandoned. The king 
built a temple at Samaria, and erected an image, 
and consecrated a grove to Baal. A multitude 
of the priests and prophets of Baal were main- 
tamed.' Idolatry became the predominant reli- 
gion ; and Jehovah, with the golden calves as 
symbolical representations of him, were viewed 
with no more reverence than Baal and his image. 
So strong was the tide of corruption, that it ap- 
peared as if the knowledge of the true God was 
soon to be for ever lost among the Israelites. 
But a man suited to this emergency was raised 
up in the person of Elijah the prophet, who 
boldly opposed himself to the regal authority, 
and succeeded in retaining many of his country- 
men in the worship of the true God. The greater 
the power which supported idolatry, the more 
striking were the prophecies and miracles which 
directed the attention of the Israelites to Je- 
hovah, and brought disgrace on the idols, arid 
confusion on their worshippers. At length the 
judgment of God on Ahab and his house was pro- 
nounced by Elijah, who announced that, during 
the reign of his son, his whole race should be ex- 
terminated. Ahab died of the wounds which he 
received in a battle with the Syrians, according 
to a prediction of Micaiah, which the king dis- 
believed, but yet endeavoured to avert by dis- 

guising himself in the action (1 Kings xvi. 29 5 
xxii. 40). 

2. AHAB and ZEDEKIAH. The names of 
two false prophets, who deceived the Israelites at 
Babylon. For this they were threatened by Je- 
remiah, who foretold that they should be put to 
death by the king of Babylon in the presence of 
those whom they had beguiled ; and that in fol- 
lowing times it should become a common male- 
diction to say, ' The Lord make thee like Ahab 
and Zedekiah, whom the king of Babylon roasted 
in the fire' (Jer. xxix. 21, 22). 

(m?n^), usually • translated Aloes, occur in 
several passages of the Old Testament, as in 
Psalm xlv. 8, ' All thy garments smell of myrrh, 
and ahaloth, and cassia ; ' Prov. vii. 17, ' I have 
perfumed my bed with myrrh, with cinnamon 
and ahalini ;' Canticles, iv. 14, ' Spikenard and 
saffron, calamus and cinnamon, with all trees of 
frankincense, myrrh and ahaloth, with all the 
chief spices.' From the articles which are as- 
sociated with ahaloth and ahalim (both names 
indicating the same thing), it is evident that it 
was some odoriferous substance, probably 'well 
known in ancient times. Why these words have 
been translated ' aloes,' not only in the English, 
but in most of the older versions, it may not be 
easy to ascertain; but there is little doubt that 
the odoriferous ahaloth of the above passages 
ought not to be confounded with the bitter and 
nauseous aloes famed only as a medicine. The 
latter, no doubt, has some agreeable odour, when 
of the best quality from the island of Socotra, 
and when freshly-imported pieces are first broken ; 
some not unpleasant odour may also be perceived 
when small pieces are burnt. But common aloes 
is usually disagreeable in odour and nauseous in 
taste, and could never have been employed as a 
perfume. Its usual name in Arabic, sibbar, has 
no resemblance to its European name. The 
earliest notice of aloes seems to be that of Dios- 
corides, iii. 25 ; the next that of Pliny (Nat. Hist. 
xxvii. 5). Both describe it as being brought 
from India, whence also probably came its name, 
which is ehca in Hindee. 

The oldest and most complete account with 
which we are acquainted of the fragrant and aro- 
matic substances known to the ancients is that 
given in the first twenty-eight chapters of the first 
book of Dioscorides. There, along with Iris, 
Acorum, Cyperum, Cardamomum, several Nards, 
Asarum, Phu, Malabathrum, Cassia, Cinnamon, 
Costus, Schaenus, Calamus aromaticus, Balsa- 
mum, Aspalathus, Crocus, &c, mention is also 
made of Agallochum, which is described as a 
wood brought from India and Arabia. In this 
list, which we shall afterwards have frequent 
occasion to refer to, we find Agallochum asso- 
ciated with most of the same substances which are 
mentioned along with it in the above passages of 
Scripture, whereas the author describes the true 
aloe in a very different part of his work. Subse- 
quently to the time of Dioscorides, we find Agallo- 
chum mentioned by Orobasius, yEtius, and P. -<Egi- 
neta; but they add nothing to the first description. 
The Arabs, however, as Bhases, Serapion, and Avi- 
cenna, were well acquainted with this substance, 
of which they describe several varieties, mostly 
named from the places where they were produced, 


and give other particulars respecting it, besides 
quoting Dioscorides and previous authors of their 
own country. In the Latin translation of Avi- 
cenna these descriptions appear under Agallo- 
chum, Xilaloe, and Lignum aloes ; but in the Ara- 
bic edition of the same author, under ^js»-U£] 
Aghlajoon, f J>-^\s] Aghalookhi, but most fully 

under t>^£ 'Aod, pronounced ood. This is one 

instance, and many others might be adduced, of 
the Arabs describing the same thing under two 
names, when they found a substance described by 
the Greeks — that is, Galen and Dioscorides, un- 
der one name, and were themselves acquainted 
with it under another. In the Persian works on 
Materia Medica (vide Abattachim) we are in- 
formed that agallokhee is the Greek name of tills 
substance, and that the Hindee name of one kind, 
by them called aod-i-hindee, is aggur. Having 
thus traced a substance which was said to come 
from India to the name by which it is known 
in that country, the next process would perhaps 
naturally have been to procure the substance, and 
trace it to the plant which yielded it. We, how- 
ever, followed the reverse method; having first 
obtained the substance called Aggur, we traced 
it, through its Asiatic synohymes, to the Agallo- 
chum of Dioscorides, and, as related in the Jllustr. 
&f Himalayan Botany, p. 171, obtained in the 
bazaars of Northern India three varieties of this 
far-famed and fragrant wood 1 — 1. aod-i-hindee; 
2. a kind procured by commerce from Surat, 
which, however, does not appear to differ essen- 
tially from the third, aod-i-kinaree, which was 
said to come from China, and is, no doubt, the 
alcamcricum of Avicenna. 

In the north-western provinces of India aggui 
is said to be brought from Surat and Calcutta. 
Garcias ab Horto (Clusius, Exotic. Hist), writing 
on this subject near the former place, says that it 
is called.' in Malacca f/arro, selectissimum autem 
Calambac.' Dr. Roxburgh, writing in Calcutta, 
states that ugooroo is the Sanscrit name of the 
incense or aloe-wood, which in Hindee is called 
tigoor, and in Persian aod-hindee ; and that there 
is little or no doubt that the real calambac or 
agallochum of the ancients is yielded by an 
immense tree, a native of the mountainous tracts 
east and south-east from Silhet, in about 24° of 
N. latitude. This plant, he says r cannot be dis- 
tinguished from thriving plants exactly of the 
same age of the Garo de Malacca received from 
that place, and then in the Botanic Garden of 
Calcutta. He further states that small quantities 
of agallochum are sometimes imported into Cal- 
cutta by sea from the eastward ; but that such is 
always deemed inferior to that of Silhet {Fiord 
Ind. ii. 423). 

The Garo de Malacca was first described by 
Lamarck from a specimen presented to him by 
Sonnerat as that of the tree which yielded the 
bois d'aigle of commerce. Lamarck named this 
tree Aquilaria Malaccensis, which Cavanilles 
afterwards changed unnecessarily to A. ovata. 
As Dr. Roxburgh found that. Lis plant belonged 
to the same geuus, he named it Aquilaria Agallo- 
chum, but it is printed Agallocha in his Flora 
Indica, probably by an oversight. He is of 
opinion that the Agcllochum secundarmm of 



Rumphius (Amb. ii. 34, t. 10), which that author 
received under the name of Agallochum malac- 
cense, also belongs to the same geuus, as well as 
the Sinfoo of Keempfer (Amosn. Exot. p. 903)., 
and the Ophispermum sinense of Loureiro. 

[Aquilaria Agallochum.] 

These plants belong to the Linnsean class and 
order Decandria monogynia, and the natural 
family of Aquilarincce ; at all eveuts, we have 
two trees ascertained as yielding this fragrant wood 
— one, Aquilaria Agallochum, a native of Silhet - 7 
and the other, A. ovata or malaccensis, a native 
of Malacca. The missionary Loureiro, in his 
description of the Flora of Cochin-China, desciibes 
a third plant, which he names Aloexylum, ' idem 
est ac lignum aloe,' and the' species A. Agallo- 
chum, represented as a large tree growing in the 
lofty mountains of Champava belonging to Co- 
chin-China, about the 13th degree of N. lat., near 
the great river ' Lavum :' ' Omnes veri aloes ligni 
species ex hac arbore procedunt, etiam pretiosis- 
sima, quas dici solet Calambac' This tree, be- 
longing to (he class and order Decandria mono- 
gynia of Linnaeus, and the natural family of 
Leguminosce, has always been admitted as one 
of the trees yielding Agallochum. But as Lou- 
reiro himself confesses that he had only once seen 
a mutilated branch of the tree in flower, which, 
by long carriage, had the petals, anthers, and 
stigma much bruised and torn, it is not impos- 
sible that this may also belong to the genus Aqui- 
laria, especially as his tree agrees in so many 
points with that described by Dr. Roxburgh, 
as already observed by the latter in his Hist. 
Flor. Ind. 1. c. Rumphius has described and 
figured a third plant, which he named arbor ex- 
ca^cans, from ' Blindhout,' in consequence of 
its acrid juice destroying sight — whence (he 
generic name of Excwcaria ; the specific one 
of agallochum he applied, because its wood is 
similar to and often substituted for agallochum : 
' Lignum hoc tantam habet cum agallocho simi- 
litudinem.' And he states that it was sometimes 
exported as such to Europe, and even to China. 
This tree, the Exca>caria agallochum, of the Lin- 
na?an class and order Dicecia (riandria, and (he 
natural family of Euphorbiacese, is also very com- 
mon in the delta of (he Ganges, where it is called 
Geria ; ' but the wood-cutters of the Sunder- 


bunds, 1 Dr. Roxburgh says, ' who are the people 
best acquainted with the nature of this tree, re- 
port the pale, white, milky juice thereof to be 
highly acrid and very dangerous.' The only use 
made of the tree, as far as Dr. Roxburgh could 
learn, was for charcoal and firewood. Agallochum 
of any sort is, he believed, never found in this 
tree, which is often the only one quoted as that 
yielding agila-wood ; but, notwithstanding the 
negative testimony of Dr. Roxburgh, it may, in 
particular situations, as stated by Rumphius, yield 
a substitute for that fragrant and long-famed wood. 
Having thus traced the agallochum of commerce 
to the trees which yield it, it is extremely interesting 
to find that the Malay name of the substance, 
which is agila, is so little different from the 
Hebrew ; not more, indeed, than may be observed 
in many well-known words, where the hard g of 
one language is turned into the aspirate in another. 
It is therefore probable that it was by the name 
agila (aghil, in Rosenmuller, Bill Bot. p. 234) 
that this wood was first known in commerce, 
being conveyed across the Bay of Bengal to the 
island of Ceylon or the peninsula of India, which 
the Arab or Phoenician traders visited at very 
remote periods, and where they obtained the early- 
known spices and precious stones of India. It is 
not a little curious that Captain Hamilton (.4c- 
count of E. Indies, i. 68) mentions it by the name 
of agala, an odoriferous wood at Muscat. We 
know that the Portuguese, when they reached the 
eastern coast from the peninsula, obtained it under 
this name, whence they called it pao d'aguila, or 
eagle-wood ; which is the origin of the generic 
name Aquilaria. 

The term agila, which in Hebrew we suppose 
to have been converted into ahel, and from 
which were formed akalim and ahaloth, appears 
to have been the source of its confusion with 
aloes. Sprengel has observed that the primitive 
name seems to be preserved in the Arabic ap- 
pellations $M\ and &^,\, which may be read 
alloeh (or alloet) and allieh. These come ex- 
tremely near \Aj\ aelica, pronounced elioa — the 

Hindoo name of the medical aloe. Hence 
the two names became confounded, and one of 
them applied to two very different substances. 
But it was soon found necessary to distin- 
guish the agallochum by the term ^vXaX6't]v, 
which has been translated into lign-aloe. That 
the name aloe was considered to be synonymous 
with akalim, at an early period, is evident, as 
' the Chaldee translation of the Psalms and Can- 
ticles, the old Latin version of the Proverbs and 
Canticles, and the Syriac translation, have all 
rendered the Hebrew word by aloes' (Rosenmuller, 
I. c. p. 234). There can be little or no doubt 
that the same odoriferous agila is intended in the 
passage of John xix. 39. When the body of our 
Saviour was taken down from the cross, Nico- 
demus, we are told, brought myrrh and aloes 
for the purpose of winding it in linen clothes 
with these spices. But the quantity (100 lbs.) 
used has been objected to by some writers, and 
therefore Dr. Harris has suggested, that, ' instead 
of kaarSv, it might originally have been 5«aToV, 
10 lbs. weight.' It is well known, however, that 
very large quantities of spices were occasionally 
used at the funerals of Jews. But before object- 


ing to the quantity of this expensive wood, dis- 
putants should have ascertained the 'proportions 
in which it was mixed with the myrrh, an article 
sufficiently abundant and of moderate price, be- 
cause easily obtained by the Arabians from the 
opposite coast of Africa. Dr. Harris has, more- 
over, objected, that ' the Indian ligivaloes is so odo- 
riferous and so agreeable, that it stands in no need 
of any composition to increase or moderate its 
perfume.' But this very excellence makes it 
better suited for mixing with less fragrant sub- 
stances, and, however large the quantity of these 
substances, like the broken vase, 'the scent of the 
roses will hang round it still.' 

The only passage 1 where there is any difficulty 
is that in which there is the earliest mention of 
the ahalok (Num. xxiv. 6). Here Balaam, 
referring to the flourishing condition of the Israel- 
ites, says, ' as the trees of akalim, which the 
Lord hath planted, and as cedar trees beside the 
waters.' Whether the expression is here to be un- 
derstood literally, or merely as a poetical form, 
is doubtful, especially as authorities differ as to 
the true reading; some versions, as the Septua- 
gint, Vulgate, Syriac, and Arabic, having 'tents' 
instead of ' lign-aloes,' from which it would seem 

that, in place of Q vHfc?, akalim, they had found 

in their copies DfTlX, okalim (Rosenmuller, 
p. 235). 

In Arabian authors numerous varieties of agallo- 
chum are mentioned. These are enumerated by 
various writers (Cels. Ilierobot. p. 143). Persian 
authors mention only three : — 1. Aod-i-kindee, that 
is, the Indian; 2. Aod-i-chinee, or Chinese kind 
(probably that from Cochin-China) ; while the 
third, or Swmmduree, a term generally applied to 
things brought from sea, may have reference to 
the inferior variety from the Indian islands. In 
old works, such as those of Bauhin and Ray, 
three kinds are also mentioned : — 1. Agallochum 
praestantissimum, also called Calambac ; 2. A. Of- 
ficinarum, or Palo de Agailla of Linschoten ; 3. 
A. sylvestre, or Aguilla brava. But besides these 
varieties, obtained from different localities, per- 
haps from different plants, there are also distinct 
varieties, obtainable from the same plant. Thus 
in a MS. account by Dr. Roxburgh, to which 
we have had access, and where, in a letter, dated 
8th Dec, 1808, from R. K. Dick, esq., judge 
and magistrate at Silhet, it is stated that four dif- 
ferent qualities may be obtained from the same 
tree: — 1st. Ghurkee, which sinks in water, and 
sells from 12 to 16 rupees per seer of 2 lbs. ; 2nd. 
Doim, 6 to 8 rupees per seer; 3rd. Siniula, 
which floats in water, 3 to 4 rupees ; and 4th, 
Choorum, which is in small pieces, and also 
floats in water, from 1 to 1^ rupee par seer (the 
three last names mean only 2nd, 3rd, and 4th 
kinds) ; and that sometimes 80 lbs. of these four 
kinds may be obtained from one tree. All these 
tuggur-tvees, as they are called, do not produce 
the Aggur, nor does every part of even the most 
productive tree. The natives cut into the wood 
until they observe dark-coloured veins yielding 
the perfume : these guide them to the place 
containing the aggur, which generally extends 
but a short way through the centre of the trunk or 
branch. An essence, or attur, is obtained by 
bruising the wood in a mortal - , and then infusing 
it in boiling water, when the attur floats on the 




surface. Early decay does not seem incident to 
■all kinds of agallochum, for we possess specimens 
of the wood gorged with fragrant resin (Illustr. 
Him. Bot. p. 173) which show no symptoms of it ; 
but still it is stated that the wood is sometimes 
buried ih the earth. This may be for the purpose of 
increasing its specific gravity. A large specimen 
in the Museum of the East India House displays 
a cancellated structure, in which the resinous 
parts remain, the rest of the wood having been 
removed, apparently by decay. — J. F. R. 

AHASUERUS (^VY!fcTI&$), or Achashve- 
roskp, is the name, or rather the title, o£ four Median 
and Persian monarchs mentioned in the Bible. The 
earlier attempts of Simonis and others to derive this 
name from the Persian dchash are unworthy of 
notice. Hyde (De Relig. Vet. Pers. p. 43) more 
boldly proposed to disregard the Masoretic punc- 
tuation, and to read the consonants, Acsuares, 
so as to correspond with '0^vdfj7]s, a Persian royal 
title. Among those who assume the identity of 
tire names Achashverosh and Xerxes, Grotefend 
believes he has discovered the true orthography of 
Xerxes in the arrowhead inscriptions of Persepolis. 
He lias deciphered signs representative of the 
sounds hhshhershe, and considers the first part 
of the word to be the Zend form of the later 
-sliah, ' king ' (Heeren's Ideen, i. 2, 350). Gesenius 
also (in his Thesaurus) assents to this, except that 
(as Reland had done before) he takes the first 
part of the word to be the original form of shir, 
a lion, and the latter to be that of shah. The 
Hebrew Achashverosh might thus be a modifica- 
tion of khshhershe : the prosthetic aleph being 
prefixed (as even Scaliger suggested), and a 
new vowel being inserted between the first two 
sounds, merely to obviate the difficulty which, as 
is well known, all Syro-Arabians find in pro- 
nouncing two consonants before a vowel. One of 
the highest authorities in such questions, however, 
A. F. Pott {Etymol. Forschuugeu, i. p. Ixv.), 
c insiders Xerxes to be a compound of the Zend 
csalkra, Jung (with loss of the t), and csahya, also 
meaning king, the original form of shah; and 
suggests that Achashverosh — its identity with 
Xerxes, as he thinks, not being established — may 
be tl ie Pehl vi huzvaresh,' hero' (from hu, ' good, ' and 
zour, ' strength'), corresponding to apfyos, which 
Herodotus (vi. 98) says is the true sense of Xerxes. 
Jahn, indeed, first proposed the derivation from 
zvaresh (in his Archiiol. ii. 2, 2-14) ; but then he 
still thought that the first part of the name was 
uchash — a modern Persian word, which only seems 
to denote price, value. Lastly, it deserves notice 
that the kethib, in Esther x. 1, has EhtPntf, 
pointed Achashresh ; and that the Syriac version 
always (and sometimes the Arabic also, as in Dan. 
ix. 1) writes the name Achshrresh. Ilgen adopts 
the kethib as the authentic consonants of the 
name ; but changes the vowels to Achsharesh, and 
modifies his etymology accordingly. 

The first Ahasuem.s (Sept. 'Acraovripos, Theo- 
dotion, Espies) is incidentally mentioned, in 
Dan. ix. 1, as the father of Darius the Mede. It 
is generally agreed that the person here referred to 
is the Astyages of profane history. See the article 

The second Ahasueras (Sept. ' Aacrovripos) oc- 
curs in Ezra iv. 6, where' it is said that in the 
beginning of his reign the enemies of the Jews 

wrote an accusation against them, the result of 
which is not mentioned. The whole question, as 
to the Persian king here meant, depends on the 
light in which the passage of this chapter, from 
ver. 6 to 24, is regarded. The view which Mr. 
Howes seems to have first proposed, and which Dr. 
Hales adopted in his Analysis of Chronology, 
proceeds on the theory that the writer of this chap- 
ter, after mentioning the interruption to the build- 
ing of the temple from the time of Cyrus down to 
that of Darius, king of Persia (ver. 1-5), is led, 
by the association of the subject, to enter into a 
detail of the hindrances thrown in the way of 
building and fortifying the city (after the temple 
had been completed), under the successors of 
Darius Hystaspis (ver. C-23) ; and that, after 
this digressive anticipation of events posterior to 
the reign of Darius, he returns (in ver. 24) to the 
history of the building of the temple under that 
prince. This view necessarily makes the Achash- 
verosh and Artachshashta of ver. 6 and 7 to be the 
successors of Darius Hystaspis, i. e. to be Xerxes 
and Artaxerxes Lonyimanus. The main argu- 
ment on which this theory rests, seems to be the 
circumstance that, in the whole passage, there is 
no mention whatever of the temple ; but, on the 
contrary, that the setting up the walls of the rebel- 
lious city forms the sole ground of complaint : so 
that the passage must refer to what occurred after 
the temple was finished (see the extract from 
Howes in the Pictorial Bible, ad loc). 

There are, however, some objections against the 
conclusiveness of this reasoning; for, first, even 
assuming the object of the enemies of the Jews, in 
this accusation, to have been to hinder the build- 
ing of the temple, it is yet easy to conceive how 
the omission of all mention of the temple might be 
compatible with their end, and dependent on the 
means they were obliged to employ. They could 
only obtain their object through the Persian king ; 
they therefore used arguments likely to weigh 
witli him. They appealed to motives of state 
policy. Accordingly, they sought to alarm his 
jealousy lest the rebellious city should become 
strong enough to resist tribute, and refuse to allow 
the transit of his armies ; they drew attention to 
the rebuilding of the defences, as the main point of 
the argument; and said nothing about the temple, 
because that would be a matter of secondary 
importance in the only point of view in which the 
subject would appear to the Persian king. But, 
secondly, it has been shown by a minute inquiry 
by Trendelenburg (in Eiclihom's Einleit. in die 
Apocryph. Schrift. p. 351), that the first book of 
the apocryphal Esdras is principally a free, but in 
parts continuous, translation of the canonical 
Ezra. It is, therefore, remarkable that the author 
of Esdras, who has taken this very account of the 
accusation from Ezra, was so far from discerning 
the omission of the temple, and the conclusion that 
Mr. Howes has drawn from it, that his letter 
(ii. 1(3-30) states, that 'The Jews, being come into 
Jerusalem, that rebellious city, do build the mar- 
ket-place, and repair the walls of it, and do lay the 
foundation of the temple .... And forasn 
as the things pertaining to the temple are now in 
hand, we think it meet not to neglect such a mat- 
ter.' Josephus also {Antiq. xi. 2), conformably 
to his general adherence, in this part, to the apo- 
cryphal Esdras, both uses, in his letter, the same 
terms about the reconstruction of the temple being 



then commenced, and even tells the whole story as 
deferring to Cambyses, which makes it clear that 
he understood the passage of the immediate suc- 
cessor of Cyrus. Thirdly, it is even probable, a 
priori, that the rebuilding of the temple and of 
the city itself would, to a certain extent, necessa- 
rily go on together. The Jews must have had 
sufficient time and need, in the fifteen years be- 
tween the accession of Cyrus and that of Darius Hys- 
taspis, to erect some buildings for the sustenance 
and defence of the colony, as well as for carrying 
on the structure of the temple itself. As we read 
of ' ceiled houses ' in Haggai i. 4, they may have 
built defences sufficient to give a colour to the 
statements of the letter; and enough to free a cri- 
tic from the necessity of transferring the passage 
in Ezra to the time of Artaxerxes Longimanus, 
solely because it speaks of the erection of the walls. 
Moreover, as Ezra (ix. 9) speaks of God having ena- 
bled the Jews to repair the temple, and of his hav- 
ing ' given them a wall in Jerusalem,' we find that, 
when the temple was finished (and no evidence 
shows how long before that), they actually had 
built a wall. Josephus also (Antiq. xi. 4, 4) 
mentions even ' strong walls with which they had 
surrounded the city ' before the temple was com- 
pleted. (It is worth while to remark that Dr. 
Hales, speaking of this wall of Ezra, endeavours, 
consistently with his theory, to make it ' most 
probably mean the fence of a shepherd" s fold, 
here figuratively taken for their establishment in 
their own land.' But any lexicon will show that 
"HS means a fence, a wall, generally ; and that 
it is only limited by the context to mean the wall 
of a garden, the fence of a fold.) Again, it is 
assumed that Nehemiah shows that the walls of 
the city were not built until his time. Not such, 
nor the same, as he erected, granted. But — to 
borrow a remark of J. D. Michaelis — when we 
read in Neh. i. 2, of the Jews who returned to 
Persia, and who answered Nehemiah's inquiry 
after the fate of the colony, by informing him that 
' the wall of Jerusalem is broken down and the 
gates thereof burned with fire,' is it possible that 
they can refer to the destruction of the walls by 
Nebuchadnezzar, 144 years before? Was such 
news so long in reaching Nehemiah ? Is it not 
much easier to believe that the Jews, soon after 
their return, erected some defences against the 
hostile and predatory clans around them ; and 
that, in the many years which intervene between 
the books of Nehemiah and Ezra (of which we 
have no record), there was time enough for those 
tribes to have burnt the gates and thrown down 
the walls of their imperfect fortifications ? Lastly, 
the view of Mr. Howes seems to require peculiar 
philological arguments, to reconcile the construc- 
tion of the digression with the ordinary style of 
Hebrew narrative, and to point out the particles, 
or other signs disjunctive, by which we may know 
that ver. 24 is to be severed from the preceding. 
Nor is it altogether a trivial objection to his 
theory, that no scholar appears to have entertained 
it before himself. The nearest approach to it has 
been made by Vitringa, who, in his Hypotyposi ' 
Temporum (cited in Michaelis's Adnott. Uberior.), 
suggests, indeed, that ver. 6 refers to Xerxes, but 
explains all the rest of the passage as applying to 

If the arguments here adduced are satisfactory, 
the Ahasuerus of our passage is the immediate 


successor of Cyrus — the frantic tyrant Cambyses, 
who came to the throne B.C. 529, and died after a 
reign of seven years and five months ; and the 
discrepancy between Ezra and the apocryphal 
Esdras and Josephus — botli of whom leave out 
ver. 6, and mention only the king of whom the de- 
tailed story of the letter is' related, whom the one 
calls Artaxerxes, and the other Cambyses — may 
be reconciled, by supposing that they each make 
the reigns of Cambyses and of the impostor Smer- 
dis into one. 

The third Ahasuerus (Sept. 'Apra^p^s) is the 
Persian king of the book of Esther. The chief 
facts recorded of him there, and the dates of 
their occurrence,, which are important in the sub- 
sequent inquiry, are these : In the third year of 
his reign he made a sumptuous banquet for all 
his nobility, and prolonged the feast for 180 days. 
Being on one occasion merry with wine, he 
ordered his queen Vashti to be brought out, to 
show the people her beauty. On her refusal to 
violate the decorum of her sex, he not only in- 
dignantly divorced her, but published an edict 
concerning her disobedience, in order to insure to 
every husband in his dominions the rule in his 
own house. In the seventh year of his reign 
he married Esther, a Jewess, who however con- 
cealed her parentage. In the twelfth year of his 
reign, his minister Haman, who had received 
some slights from Mordecai the Jew, offered him 
10,000 talents of silver for the privilege of or- 
dering a massacre of the Jews in all parts of the 
empire on an appointed day. The king refused 
this immense sum, but acceded to his request; 
and couriers were despatched to the most, distant 
provinces to enjoin the execution of this decree. 
Before it was accomplished, however, Mordecai 
and Esther obtained such an influence over him, 
that he so far annulled his recent enactment as to 
despatch other couriers to empower the Jews to 
defend themselves manfully against their enemies 
on that day ; the result of which was, that they 
slew 800 of his native subjects in Shushan, and 
75,000 of them in the provinces. 

Although almost every Medo-Persianking, bom 
Cyaxares I. down to Artaxerxes III. (Ochus),has in . 
his turn found some champion to assert his title to 
be the Ahasuerus of Esther, yet the present inquiry 
may reasonably be confined within much nar- 
rower limits than would be requisite for a dis- 
cussion of all the rival claims which have been 
rjreferred. A succinct statement, principally de- 
rived from Justi's ingenious Versuch iJber den 
Konig Ahasverus (in Eichhorn's Repertorium, 
xv. 1-38), will suffice to show that Darius Hysta- 
spis is the earliest Persian king in whom the 
plainest marks of identity are not evidently want- 
ing ; that Darius Hystaspis himself is, neverthe- 
less, excluded on less obvious, but still adequate 
grounds ; and that the whole question lies, and 
with what preponderance of probability, between 
Xerxes and his successor Artaxerxes Longi- 

As Ahasuerus reigned from India to Ethiopia 
(Esth. i. 1), and imposed a tribute (not neces- 
sarily for the first time) on the land and isles of 
the sea (x. 1) ; and laid the disobedience of 
Vashti before the seven princes which see the 
king's face, and sit first in the kingdom (i. 14) : 
it is argued that these three circumstances concur, 
according to the testimony of profane history, 


jj exclude all the predecessors of Darius Hystaspis. 
For Darius was the first Persian king who sub- 
dued India, which thenceforth formed the twen- 
tieth province of his empire ; and, as for Ethiopia, 
Cambyses, who first invaded if, only obtained a 
partial conquest there (Herod, iv. 44; iii. 25, 
94). Darius was also the first who imposed a 
stated tribute on the different provinces of the 
empire, as, from the times of Cyrus, the revenue 
depended on the voluntary gifts of the people 
(Herod, iii. 89). Lastly, the seven princes, and 
their privilege of seeing the king's face, are traced 
to the events attending the elevation of Darius to 
the throne : when the seven conspirators who slew 
the usurper Smerdis stipulated, before ever it was 
decided which of their number should obtain the 
crown, that all the seven should enjoy special pri- 
vileges, and, among others, this very one of seeing 
the king at any time without announcement 
(Herod, iii. 84). This is confirmed by the fact, 
that although the Persian counsellors of the time 
anterior to Darius are often mentioned (as when 
Cambyses laid before them a question parallel to 
that about Vashti, Herod, iii. 31), yet the definite 
number seven does not occur ; whereas, after 
Darius, we find the seven counsellors both in 
Esther, and again in the reign of Artaxerxes Longi- 
manus (Ezra vii. 14). (It is an oversight to ap- 
peal to this. account of the seven conspirators, in 
order to find the precise number of seven princes. 
For the narrative in Herodotus shows that, as 
Darius was chosen king 4om among the seven, 
there could only be six persons- to claim the pri- 
vilege of seeing the king's face ; not to insist that 
Otanes, who made a separate demand for himself, 
and who withdrew from the party before those sti- 
pulations were made, may 2'>ossibly have reduced 
the number of privileged counsellors .tojlve.) 

But neither can it be Darius Hystaspis himself, 
although he possesses all these marks of agreement 
with the person intended in the book of Esther. 
For, first, not only can none of the names of the 
seven conspirators, as given either by Herodotus 
or by Ctesias, be brought to accord with the 
names of the seven princes in Esther ; but, what 
is of greater importance, it is even more difficult 
to find the name of Darius himself in Acbashve- 
rosh. For, notwithstanding the diverse corrup- 
tions to which proper names are exposed when 
transmitted through different foreign languages, 
there is yet such an agreement between the Zend 
name found by Grotefend in the cuneiform in- 
scriptions, and the Darius of the Greeks, and 
Darjuvesh (the name by which Darius Hystaspis 
as undoubtedly designated elsewhere in the Old 
Testament), that the genuineness of tins title is 
open to less suspicion than that of almost any 
other Persian king. It would, therefore, be inex- 
plicable that the author of the book of Esther 
above all others should not only not call him by 
the authentic name of sacred as well as profane 
history, but should apply to him a name which 
has been shown to be given, in almost all con- 
temporary books of the Old Testament, to other 
Persian kings. Secondly, the moral evidence is 
against him. The mild and just character 
ascribed to Darius renders it highly improbable 
that, after favouring the Jews from the second to 
the sixth year of his reign, he should become a 
senseless tool in the hands of Hainan, and con- 
sent to their extirpation. Lastly, we read of his 



marrying two daughters and a granddaughter of 
Cyrus, and a daughter of Otanes — and these only ; 
would Darius have repudiated one of these for 
such a trifle, when his peculiar position, as the 
first king of his race, must have rendered such 
alliances indispensable ? 

It only remains now to weigh the evidence 
against Artaxerxes, in order to lead more co- 
gently to the only alternative left — that it is 
Xerxes. As Artaxerxes allowed Ezra to go to 
Jerusalem with a colony of exiles in the seventh 
year of his reign (Ezra vii. 1-7) ; and as he issued 
a decree in terms so exceedingly favourable to 
the religious as well as civil interests of the Jews 
(giving them liberal grants and immunities, 
speaking of their law as the law of the God of 
heaven, and threatening punishment to whoever 
would not do the law of God and of the king, Ezra 
vii. 11-26): how could Haman (i /?ie years after- 
wards, venture to describe the Jews to him as a 
people whom, on the very account of their law, it 
was not for the king's profit to suffer ? And how 
could Haman so directly propose their extermi- 
nation, in the face of a decree so signally in their 
favour, and so recently issued by the same king ? 
especially as the laws of the Medes and Persians 
might not be altered ! Again, as Artaxerxes 
(assuming always that lie is the Artaehsbast of 
Ezra vii. 1, and not Xerxes, as is nevertheless 
maintained by J. D. Michaelis, Jahn, and De 
Wette) was capable of such liberality to the 
Jews in the seventh year of his reign, let us not 
forget that, if he is the Ahasuerus of the book of 
Esther, it was in that same year that he married 
the Jewess. Now, if — by taking the first and 
tenth months in the seventh year of the king (the 
dates of the departure of Ezra, and of the marriage 
of Esther) to be the first and tenth months of the 
Hebrew year (as is the usual mode of notation ; 
see Hitzig, Die xii Kleinen Propheten, note to 
Haggai i. 1), and not the first and tenth from the 
period of his accession — we assume that the de- 
parture of Ezra took place after his marriage 
with her, his clemency might be the effect of her 
influence on his mind. Then we have to explain 
how he could be induced to consent to the extir- 
pation of the Jews in the twelfth year of his reign, 
notwithstanding that her influence still continued 
— for we find it evidently at work in the twelfth 
year. But if, on the other hand, his indulgence 
to Ezra was before his marriage, then we have 
even a greater difficulty to encounter. For then 
Artaxerxes must have acted from his own un- 
biassed lenity, and his purposed cruelty in the 
twelfth year would place him in an incongruous 
opposition with himself. As we, moreover, find 
Artaxerxes again propitious to their interests, in 
the twentieth year of his reign — when lie allowed 
Nehemiah to return to Jerusalem — it is much 
easier to believe that he was also favourably dis- 
posed to them in the twelfth. At any rate, it 
would be allowing Esther a long time to exercise 
an influence on his disposition, if his clemency in 
the twentieth year was due to her, and not -to his 
own inclination. Besides, the fact that neither 
Ezra nor Nehemiah gives the least hint th. 
liberal policy of Artaxerxes towards them was 
owing to the influence of their countrywoman, is 
an important negative point in the scale of proba- 
bilities. In this case also there is a serious diffi- 
culty in the name. As Artaxerxes is called 





Artachshast in Ezra and Nehemiah, we cer- 
tainly might expect the author of the book of 
Esther to agree with them in the name of a king 
whom they all had had such occasion to know. 
Nor is it, perhaps, unimportant to add, that 
Norberg asserts, on the authority of native Per- 
sian historians, that the mother of Bahman, i. e. 
Artaxerxes Longimanus, was a Jewess ( Opus- 
cula Acad. iii. 218). This statement would 
agree excellently with the theory that Xerxes was 
. Ahasuerus. Lastly, the joint testimony borne 
to his clemency and magnanimity by the acts 
recorded of him in Ezra and Nehemiah, and by 
the accordant voice of profane writers (Plutarch, 
Artaxerxes ; Diodor. Sic. xi. 71 ; Ammian. Mar- 
cell, xxx. 8), prevents us from recognising Ar- 
taxerxes in the debauched, imbecile, and cruel 
tyrant of the book of Esther. 

On the ground of moral resemblance to that 
tyrant, however, every trait leads us to Xerxes. 
The king who scourged and fettered the sea ; who 
beheaded his engineers because the elements de- 
stroyed their bridge over the Hellespont ; who so 
ruthlessly slew the eldest son of Pythius because 
his father besought him to leave him one sole sup- 
port of his declining years ; who dishonoured the 
remains of the valiant Leonidas ; and who be- 
guiled the shame of his defeat by such a course of 
sensuality, that he publicly offered a reward for 
the inventor of a new pleasure — is just the despot 
to divorce his queen because she would not ex- 
pose herself to the gaze of drunken revellers ; is 
just the despot to devote a whole people, his sub- 
jects, to an indiscriminate massacre; and, by way 
of preventing that evil, to restore them the right 
of self-defence (which it is hard to conceive how 
the first edict ever could have taken away), and 
thus to sanction their slaughtering thousands of 
his other subjects. 

There are also remarkable coincidences of date 
between the history of Xerxes and that of Aha- 
suerus. In the third year of his reign the latter 
gave a grand feast to his nobles, which lasted ISO 
days (Esth. i. 3) ; the former, in his third year, 
also assembled his chief officers to deliberate on 
the invasion of Greece (Herod, vii. 8). Nor 
should we wonder to find no nearer agreement in 
the two "accounts than is expressed in the mere 
fact of the nobles being assembled. The two re- 
lations are quite compatible : each writer only 
mentioning that aspect of the event which had 
interest for him. Again, Ahasuerus married 
Esther at Shushan, in the seventh year of his 
reign : in the same year of his reign, Xerxes re- 
turned to Susa with the mortification of his de- 
feat, and sought to forget himself in pleasure ; — 
not an unlikely occasion for that quest for fair 
virgins for the harem (Esth. ii. 2). Lastly, the 
tribute imposed on the land and isles of the sea 
also accords with the state of his revenue ex- 
hausted by his insane attempt against Greece. 
In fine, these arguments, negative and affirmative, 
render it so highly probable that Xerxes is the 
Ahasuerus of the book of Esther, that to de- 
mand more conclusive evidence, would be to 
mistake the very nature of the question. 

The fourth Ahasuevus('A<rovr}pos) is mentioned 
in Tobit xiv. 15, in connection with the destruction 
of Nineveh. That circumstance points out Cy- 
axares I. as the person intended (Herod, i. 106). 


AHAVA (K)l]N ; Sept. 'Aoue, Ezra viii. 21 
31, and "Evel, verse 15), the river by which the 
Jewish exiles assembled their second caravan 
under Ezra, when returning to Jerusalem. It 
would seem from ch. viii. 15, that it was desig- 
nated from a town of the same name : ' I as- 
sembled them at the river that flows towards 
Ahava.' In that case, it could not have been of 
much importance in itself; and possibly it was 
no other than one of the numerous canals with 
which Babylonia then abounded. This is pro- 
bably the true reason that Biblical geographers 
have failed to identify it. Some have sought the 
Ahava in the Lycus or Little Zab, finding that 
this river was anciently called Adiaba or Diaba. 
But these names would, in Hebrew characters, 
have no resemblance to JOHN ; and it is exceed 
ingly unlikely that the rendezvous for a Palestine 
caravan should have been north-east of the Tigris 
in Assyria, with the two great rivers, Tigris and 
Euphrates, between them and the plains they were 
to traverse. It is not so clear, however, that 
Rosenmuller is right in supposing that it probably 
lay to the south-west of Babylonia, because that 
teas in the direction of Palestine. It is too 
much forgotten by him and other writers, that 
caravan routes seldom run in straight lines be- 
tween two places. In this case, a straight line 
would have taken the caravan through the whole 
breadth of a desert seldom traversed but by the 
Arabs ; and to avoid, this, the usual . route for 
large caravans lay, and still lies, north-west through 
Mesopotamia, much above Babylonia ; and then, 
the Euphrates being crossed, the direction is south- 
west to Palestine. The greater probability, there- 
fore, is, that the Ahava was one of the streams 
or canals of Mesopotamia communicating with 
the Euphrates, somewhere in the north-west of 

AHAZ (TH^, possessor; Sept. "AxaC> Joseph. 
'AxdCrjs), son of Jotham, and eleventh king of 
Judah, who reigned sixteen years, from b.c. 775 
to 759. Ahaz was the most corrupt monarch that 
had hitherto appeared in Judah. He respected 
neither Jehovah, the law, nor the prophets ; he 
broke through all the restraints which law and 
custom had imposed upon the Hebrew kings, and 
had regard only to his own depraved inclinations. 
He introduced the religion of the Syrians into 
Jerusalem, erected altars to the Syrian gods, al- 
tered the temple in many respects after the Syrian 
model, and at length ventured to shut it up alto- 
gether. Such a man could not exercise that faith in 
Jehovah, as the political head of the nation, which 
ought to animate the courage of a Hebrew king. 
Hence, after he had sustained a few repulses from 
Pekah and Rezin, his allied foes, when the Edom- 
ites had revolted from him, and the Philistines 
were making incursions into his country, notwith- 
standing a sure promise of divine deliverance, he 
called Pul, the king of Assyria, to his aid [Assy- 
ria]. He even became tributary to that monarch, 
on condition of his obliging Syria and Israel to 
abandon their design of destroying the kingdom 
of Judah ; and thus afforded to Tiglath-pilezer, 
the successor of Pul, an opportunity of conquering 
Syria, Israel beyond the Jordan, and Galilee. It 
would be wrong, however, to say that this would 
not have occurred but for the application of 
Ahaz ; for the Assyrians were then prepared to 




extend their empire west of the Euphrates, and 
would assuredly have done so without the imme- 
diate occasion which that application offered. 
The Assyrians, as might be expected, acted only 
with a view to their own • interests, and afforded 
Ahaz no real assistance ; on the contrary, they 
drove him to such extremities that he was 
scarcely able, with all the riches of the temple, 
of the nobility, and of the royal treasury, to 
purchase release from his troublesome protectors. 
He died at the age of thirty-six (2 Kings xvi. ; 
2 Chrou. xxviii. ; Isa. vii. ; J aim, Biblisches Ar- 
chdologic, ii. 185; iii. 145; Hales, Analysis, ii. 

1. AHAZIAH (nni>S and -lnnnK, whom 
Jehovah sustains ; Sept. Oy % o^ias), son and suc- 
cessor of Ahab, and seventh king of Israel. He 
reigned two years, b.c. 897-895. It seems that 
Jezebel exercised over her son the same influence 
which had guided her husband ; and Ahaziah 
pursued the evil courses of his father. The 
most signal public event of his reign was the 
revolt of the Moabites, who took the opportunity 
of the defeat and death of Ahab to discontinue 
the tribute which they had paid to the Israelites. 
Ahaziah became a party in the attempt of Jeho- 
shaphat, king of Juilah, to revive the maritime 
traffic by the Red Sea ; in consequence of which 
the enterprise was blasted, and came to nothing 
(2 Chron. xx. 35-37). Soon after, Ahaziah, having 
been much injured by a fall from the roof-gallery 
of his palace, had the infatuation to send to 
consult the oracle of Baal-zebub, the god of 
Ekron, respecting his recovery. But the mes- 
sengers were met and sent back by Elijah, who 
announced to the king that he should rise no more 
from the bed on which he lay (1 Kings xxii. 51, 
to 2 Kings i. 50). 

2. AHAZIAH, otherwise Jehoahaz, son of 
Jehoram by Athaliah, daughter of Ahab and 
Jezebel, and sixth king of Judah. He reigned 
but one year (b.c. 885), and that ill, suffering 
himself in all things to be guided by the wicked 
counsels of his idolatrous mother, Athaliah. He 
cultivated the connections which had unhappily 

I grown up between the two dynasties, and which 
had now been cemented by marriage. Hence he 
joined his uncle Jehoram of Israel in an expe- 
dition against Hazael, king of Damascene-Syria, 
for the recovery of Ramoth-Gilead ; and after- 
wards paid him a visit while he lay wounded in 
his summer palace of Jezreel. The two kings 
rode out in their several chariots to meet Jehu ; 
and when Jehoram was shot through the heart, 
Ahaziah attempted to escape, but was pursued, 
and being mortally wounded, had only strength to 
reach Megiddo, where he died. His body was 
conveyed by his servants in a chariot to Jeru- 
salem for interment (2 Kings ix. 22-28). In 
2 Chron. xxii. 7-9, the circumstances are some- 
what differently stated ; but the variation is not 
substantial, and requires no particular notice. It 
appears from that passage, however, that Jehu 

. was right in considering Ahaziah as included 
in his commission to root out the house of Ahab. 
He was Ahab's descendant (grandson by the 
mother's side) both in blood and character; and 
his presence in Jezreel at the time of Jehu's 
operations • is considered as an arrangement of 
Providence for accomplishing his doom. 

AHIAH (iljnX, f rater Jehovce, i.e. friend 
of God; Sept. 'Ax'a, 1 Sam. viii. 3), son of 
Ah i tub, and high-priest in the reign of Saul, 
and brother and predecessor of the Abimelech 
whom Saul slew for assisting David. Seeing that 
Abimelech, a son of Ahitub, was also high-priest 
in the same reign (1 Sam. xxii. 1), some have 
thought that both names belonged to the same 
person ; but this seems less likely than the expla- 
nation which lias just been given. 

AHIAH, one of the two secretaries of Solo- 
mon (1 Kings iv. 3). Two other persons of this 
name occur in 1 Sam. xiv. 3 ; 1 Chron. viii. 7. 

AHIAM, one of David's thirty heroes (2 Sam. 
xxiii. 33). 

AHIEZER, the hereditary chief or prince of 
the tribe of Dan at the time that the Israelites 
quitted Egypt (Num. i. 12). 

AHIHUD, a prince of the tribe of Asher, 
who, with the other chiefs of tribes, acted with 
Joshua and Eleazer in dividing the Promised 
Land (Num. xxxiv. 27). 

AHIJAH (same name as Ahiah), a prophet 
residing in Shiloh in the times of Solomon and 
Jeroboam. He appears to have put on record 
some of the transactions of the former reign 
(2 Chron. ix. 29). It devolved on him to an- 
nounce and sanction the separation of the ten 
tribes from the house of David, as well as the 
foundation (1 Kings xi. 29-39), and, after many 
years, the subversion of the dynasty of Jeroboam 
(1 Kings xiv. 7-11) [Jeroboam]. 

AHIKAM, one of the four persons of distinc- 
tion whom Josiah sent to consult Huldah, the 
prophetess (2 Kings xxii. 12-14). Ahikam and 
his family are honourably distinguished for their 
protection of the prophet Jeremiah (Jer. xxvi. 29 ; 
xxxix. 14). 

AHIMAAZ (}W™, brother of anger, I. e. 
irascible; Sept. 'Axi/J-das), son and successor of 
Zadok, who was joint high-priest in the reign 
of David, and sole high-priest in that of Solomon. 
His history chiefly belongs to the time of David, 
to whom he rendered an important service during 
the revolt of Absalom. David having refused to 
allow the ark of God to be taken from Jerusalem 
when he fled thence, the high-priests, Zadok and 
Abiathar, necessarily remained in attendance 
upon it; but their sons, Ahimaaz and Jonathan, 
concealed themselves outside the city, to be in 
readiness to bear oil' to David any important in- 
formation respecting the movements and designs 
of Absalom which they might receive from 
within. Accordingly, Hushai having commu- 
nicated to the priests the result of the council of 
war, in which his own advice was preferred to 
that of Ahithophel [Absalom], they instantly 
sent a girl (probably to avoid suspicion) to direct 
Ahimaaz and Jonathan to speed away with (lie 
intelligence. The transaction, however, was wit- 
nessed and betrayed by a lad, and the messengers 
were so hotly pursued that they look refuge in a 
dry well, over which the woman of the house 
placed a covering, and spread thereon parched 
corn. She told the pursuers that the messengers 
had passed on in baste ; and when all was sate, 
she released them, on which they made their wav 
to David (2 Sam. xv. 24-37 ; xvii. 15-21 '). As 
may be inferred from his being chosen for this 
service, Ahimaaz was swift of foot. Of this we 




have a notable example soon after, when, on the 
defeat and death of Absalom, he prevailed on Joab 
to allow him to carry the tidings to David. 
Another messenger, Cushi, had previously been 
despatched, but Ahimaaz outstripped him, and 
first came in with the news. He was known afar 
off by the manner of his running, and the king 
said, ' He is a good man, and cometh with good 
tidiiigs :' and this favourable character is justified 
by the delicacy with which he waived that part 
of his intelligence concerning the death of Ab- 
salom, which he knew would greatly distress so' 
fond a father as David (2 Sam. xviii. 19-33). 

AHIMAN", one of three famous giants, of the 
race of Anak, who dwelt at Hebron when the 
Hebrew spies explored the land (Num. xiii. 22). 

AHIMELECH (?|j?»^nK, brother of the king, 
i. e. the king's friend ; Sept. 'A/Si/ieAex ; Cod. 
Alex. 'A^i/ieAex), son of Ahitub, and brother of 
Ahiah, who was most probably his predecessor in 
the high-priesthood [Ahiah]. When David fled 
from Saul, he went to Nob, a city of the priests 
in Benjamin, where the tabernacle then was ; and 
by representing himself as on pressing business 
from the king, he obtained from Ahimelech, who 
had no other, some of the sacred bread which had 
been removed from the presence-table. He was 
also furnished with the sword which he had him- 
self taken from Goliah, and which bad been laid 
up as a trophy in the tabernacle (1 Sam. xxi. 
1-9). These circumstances were witnessed by 
Doeg, an Edomite in the service of Saul, and 
were so reported by him to tli3 jealous king as to 
appear acts of connivance at,, and support to, 
David's imagined disloyal designs. Saul imme- 
diately sent for Ahimelech and the other priests 
then at Nob, and laid this treasonable offence to 
their charge; but they declared their ignorance 
tf any hostile designs on the. part of David 
towards Saul or his kingdom. This, however, 
availed them not; for the king commanded his 
guard to slay them. Their refusal to fall upon 
persons invested with so sacred a character might 
have brought even Saul to reason ; but he re- 
peated the order to Doeg himself, and was too 
readily obeyed by that malignant person, who, 
with the men under his orders, not only slew 
the priests then present, eighty-six in number, but 
marched to Nob, and put to the sword every 
living creature it contained. The only priest that 
escaped was Abiathar, Ahimelech' s son, who fled 
to David, and afterwards became high priest (1 
Sam. xxii.) [Abiathar]. 

AHINADAB, one of the twelve officers who, 
in as many districts into which the country was 
divided, raised supplies of provisions in monthly 
rotation for the royal household. Ahinadab's 
district was the southern half of the region beyond 
the Jordan (I Chron. vi. 23). 

AHINOAM (D^nS, brother of grace; 
Sept. 'A^ifaa/i), a woman of Jezreel, one of the 
wives of David, and mother of Amnon. She was 
taken captive by the Amalekites when they plun- 
dered Ziklag, but was recovered by David (1 Sam. 
xxv. 43 ; xxvii. 3 ; xxx. 5 ; 2 Sam. ii. 2; iii. 2). 

AHIO (VnK, brotherly ; Sept., as an appel- 
lative, his [Uzzah's] brothers — ol aSeXtyol avrov), 
one of the sons of Abinadab, who, with his brother 
Uzzah, drove the new cart on which the ark was 

placed when David first attempted to remove it 
to Jerusalem. Ahio went before to guide the 
oxen, while Uzzah walked by the cart (2 Sam. 
vi. 3, 4. [Uzzah.] 

AHIRA, chief of the tribe of Naphtali when 
the Israelites quitted Egypt (Num. i. 15). 

AHISHAR, the officer who was ' over the 
household ' of King Solomon (1 Kings iv. 6). 
This has always been a place of high, importance 
and great influence in the East. 

AHITHOPHEL (^h^, brother of fool- 
ishness, i.e. foolish; Sept. 'AxirocpeX), the very 
singular name of a man who, in the time of 
David, was renowned throughout all Israel for 
his worldly wisdom. He is, in fact, the only 
man mentioned in the Scriptures as having ac- 
quired a reputation for political sagacity among 
the Jews ; and they regarded his counsels as 
oracles (2 Sam. xvi. 23). He was of the council 
of David ; but was at Giloh, his native place, at 
the time of the revolt of Absalom, by whom he was 
summoned to Jerusalem ; and it shows the 
strength of Absalom's cause in Israel that a man 
so capable of foreseeing results, and estimating 
the probabilities of success, took his side in so 
daring an attempt (2 Sam. xv. 12). The news 
of his defection appears to have occasioned 
David more alarm than any other single in- 
cident in the rebellion. He earnestly prayed 
God to turn the sage counsel of Ahithophel 
' to foolishness ' (probably alluding to his name); 
and being immediately after j .ined by his 
old friend Hushai, he induced him to go 
over to Absalom with the expiess view that he 
might be instrumental in defeating the counsels 
of this dangerous person (xv. 31-37). Psalm lv. 
is supposed to contain (12-14) a further expres- 
sion of David's feelings at this treachery of one 
whom he had so completely trusted, and whom 
he calls ' My companion, my guide, and my 
familiar friend.' The detestable advice which 
Ahithophel gave Absalom to appropriate his 
father's harem, cornmittett him absolutely to the 
cause of the young prince, since after that he 
could hope for no reconcilement with David 
(2 Sam. xvi. 20-23). His proposal as to the con- 
duct of the war undoubtedly indicated the best 
course that could have been taken under the cir- 
cumstances ; and so it seemed to the council, 
until Hushai interposed with his plausible ad- 
vice, the object of which was to gain time to 
enable David to collect his resources [Absalom]. 
When Ahithophel saw that his counsel was re- 
jected for that of Hushai, the far-seeing man 
gave up the cause of Absalom for lost ; and he 
forthwith saddled his ass, returned to his home 
at Giloh, deliberately settled his affairs, and then 
hanged himself, and was buried in the sepulchre 
of his fathers, b.c. 1023 (ch. xvii.). This is the 
oidy case of suicide which the Old Testament re- 
cords, unless the last acts of Samson and Saul 
may be regarded as such. 

1. AHITUB Q-IDTIX, brother of goodness 
or benignity ', i.e. benign; Sept. 'Axircofi), son of 
Phinehas, and grandson of the high-priest Eli. 
His father Phinehas having been slain when the 
ark of God was taken by the Philistines, he suc- 
ceeded his grandfather Eli B.C. 1141, and was 
himself succeeded by his son Ahiab about b.c. 


2. AHITUB was also the name of the father 
of Zadok, who was made high-priest hy Saul 
after the death of Ahimelech (2 Sam. viii. 17 ; 
1 Chron. vi. 8). There is not the slightest ground 
for the notion that this Ahitub was ever high-priest 
himself— indeed, it is historically impossible. 

AHOLAH and AHOLIBAH (i"^nX and 
fDyHN), two fictitious or symbolical names 
adopted by Ezekiel (xxiii. 4) to denote the 
two kingdoms of Samaria (Israel) and Judah. 
There is a significant force in these names which 
must be noted. Aholah, n?nK, is usually 
rendered ' a tent,'' but more properly, tentorium 
mum (habet ilia), . ' she has her own tent or 
temple,' signifying that she has a tent or taber- 
nacle of her. own or of human invention. Aho- 
libah, HXTlNj means ' my tent, i. e. temple, 
is in her J that is to say — I, Jehovah, have 
given her a temple and religious service. They 
are both symbolically described as lewd women, 
adulteresses, prostituting themselves to the Egyp- 
tians and the Assyrians, in imitating their abomi- 
nations and idolatries ; wherefore Jehovah aban- 
doned them to those very people for whom they 
showed such inordinate and impure affection. 
They were carried into captivity, and reduced to 
the severest servitude. But the crime of Aholibah 
was greater than that of Aholah, for she possessed 
more distinguished privileges, and refused to be in- 
structed by the awful example of her sister's ruin. 
The allegory is an epitome of the history of the 
Jewish church. 

AHOLIAB, of the tribe of Dan, a skilful 
artificer appointed along with Bezaleel to construct 
the Tabernacle (Exod. xxxv. 34). 

AHUZZATH (n-triS, a possession), the 
'friend' of Abimelech II., king of'Gerar, who 
attended him on his visit to Isaac (Gen. xxvi. 26). 
In him occurs the first instance of that unofficial 
but important personage in ancient Oriental 
courts, called ' the king's friend,' or favourite. 
Several interpreters, following the Chaldee and 
Jerome, take Ahuzzath to be an appellative, de- 
noting a company of friends, who attended Abi- 
melech. The Sept. has 'Ox<>(ad 6 vvfupayoeybs 

AI {% Josh. vii. 2 ; *$$, Gen. xii. 8 ; in 
Neh. xi. 31, X*y ; in Isa. x. 28, tV)} ; Sept. 
'Ayyai, 'Ayya'i, and Ta'i ; Vulg. Hai), a royal 
city of the Canaanites, which lay east of Bethel. 
It existed in the time of Abraham, who pitched 
his tent between it and Bethel (Gen. xii. 8 ; 
xiii. 3) ; but it is chiefly noted for its capture 
and destruction by Joshua (vii. 2-5 ; viii. 1-29). 
This, as a military transaction, is noticed else- 
where [Ambuscade]. At a later period Ai 
was rebuilt, and is mentioned by Isaiah (x. 28), 
and also after the captivity. The site was 
known, and some scanty ruins still existed in 
the time of Eusebius and Jerome (Onomast. in 
Agai), but Dr. Robinson was unable to discover 
any certain traces of either. He remarks (Bib. 
Researches, ii. 313), however, that its situation 
with regard to Bethel may be well determined by 
the facts recorded in Scripture. That Ai lay to 
the east of Bethel is distinctly stated ; and the two 
cities were not so far distant from each other but 
that the men of Bethel mingled in the pursuit of 



the Israelites when they feigned to flee before the 
king of Ai, and thus both cities were left defence- 
less (Josh. viii. 17) ; yet they were not so near 
but that Joshua could place an ambush on the 
west (or south-west) of Ai, without its being ob- 
served by the men of Bethel, while he himself 
remained behind in a valley to the north of Ai 
(Josh. viii. 4, 11-13). A little to the south of a 
village called Deir Diwan, and one hour's journey 
from Bethel, the site of an ancient place is in- 
dicated by reservoirs hewn in the rock, exca- 
vated tombs, and foundations of hewn stone. 
This, Dr. Robinson inclines to think, may mark 
the site of Ai, as it agrees with all the intimations 
as to its position. Near it, on the north, is the 
deep Wady el-Mutyah, and towards the south- 
west other smaller wadys, in which the ambus- 
cade of the Israelites might easily have been 

AIL (?)K; Sept. icpios; deer, generically, ac- 

. cording to Dr. Shaw) : 

AJAL (?*K ; Sept. eAacpos ; hart, in Deut. xii. 

. 15 ; Ps. xlii. I ; Isa. xxxv. 6) : 

■ AJALAH (H ?JX ; Sept. areAexos ; hind, in 

Gen. xlix. 21 ; 2 Sam. xxii. 

34; Job xxxix. 1; Ps. xviii. 31; Prov. v. 19; 

Cant. ii. 7 ; Jer. xiv. 5 ; Habak. iii. 19). 

-^ho — . 
[Cervus barbarus.J 

The hart and hind of our versions and of the older 
comments ; but this interpretation is generally 
rejected by recent writers, who either suppose 
different species of antelope to be meant, or, 
with Dr. Shaw, consider the term to be generical 
for several species of deer taken together. Sir J. G. 
Wilkinson believes Ajal to be the Ethiopian oryx, 
with nearly straight horns. In the article Ante- 
lope it will be shown under what terms the Oryges 
appear to be noticed in the Bible, and at present we 
only observe that an Ethiopian species could not 
well be meant where the clean animals fit for the 
food of Hebrews are indicated, nor where allu- 
sion is made to suffering from thirst, and to high 
and rocky places as the refuge of females^ or of 
both, since all the species of oryx inhabit the 
open plains, and are not remarkable for their desire 
of drinking; nor can either of these propensities 
be properly ascribed to tie true antelopes, or ga- 
zelbe, of Arabia and Syria, all being residents of 
the plain and the desert ; like the oryges, ollen 



seen at immense distances from water, and un- 
willing to venture into forests, where their velocity 
of flight and delicacy of structure impede and 
destroy them. Taking the older interpretation, 
and reviewing all the texts where hart and hind 
are mentioned, we find none where these ob- 
jections truly apply. Animals of the stag kind 
prefer the security of forests, are always most 
robust in rocky mountain covers, and seek water 
with considerable anxiety; for of all the light- 
footed ruminants, they alone protrude the tongue 
when hard pressed in the chace. Now, comparing 
these qualities with several texts, we find them 
perfectly appropriate to the species of these genera 
alone. Ajal appears to be a mutation of a com- 
mon name with e\a<pos ; and although no great 
stress should be laid on names which, more par- 
ticularly in early times, were used without much 
attention to specific identity, yet we find the' 
Chaldee Ajal and Sarmatic. Jelen strictly applied 
to stag. Hence the difficulty lay in the modern 
denial that ruminants with branched deciduous 
horns existed in the south-west of Asia and Egypt; 
and Cuvier for some time doubted, notwithstanding. 
Virgil's notice, whether they were found in any 
part of Africa ; nevertheless, though not abundant 
where water is rare, their existence from Morocco 
to the Nile and beyond it cannot be denied ; and 
it is likely that an Asiatic species still appears 
sometimes in Syria, and, no doubt, was formerly 
common there. 

The first species here referred to is now known 
by the name of Cervus Barbaras, or Barbary stag, 
in size between our red and fallow deer, distin- 
guished by the want of a bisantler, or second 
branch on the horns, reckoning from below, and by 
a spotted livery, which is effaced only in the third 
or fourth year. This species is figured on Egyptian 
monuments, is still occasionally seen about the 
Natron lakes west of the Nile, and, it seems, was 
observed by a reverend friend in the desert east of 
the Dead Sea, on his route from Cairo towards 
Damascus. We "take this to be the Igial or Ajal 
of the Arabs, the same which they accuse of 
eating fish — that is, the ceps, lizards, and snakes, 
a propensity common to other species, and simi- 
larly ascribed to the Virginian and Mexican 

The other is the Persian stag, or Maral of the 
Tahtar nations, and Gewazen of Armenia, larger 
than the stag of Europe, clothed with a heavy 
mane, and likewise destitute of bisanlters. We 
believe this species to be the Soegur of Asiatic 
Turkey, and Mara of the Arabs, and therefore resi- 
ding on the borders of the mountain forests of Syria 
and Palestine. One or both of these species were 
dedicated to the local bona dea on Mount Li- 
banus — a presumptive proof that deer were found 
in the vicinity. 

Of the hind it is unnecessary to say more than 
that she is the female of the stag, or hart, and that 
in the manners of these animals the males always 
are the last, to hurry into cover.* — C. H. S. 

* In Gen. xlix. 21, Bochart's version appears 
to be preferable to our present translation — 
' Naphtali is a hind let loose ; he giveth goodly 
words ;' this, by a slight alteration of the punc- 
tuation in the Hebrew, he renders ' Naphtali is a 
spreading tree, shooting forth beautiful branches.' 
In Ps. xxix. 9, instead of ' The voice of the Lord 


AIN (pty, usually En in the English ver- 
sion), the Hebrew word for a fountain, which 
signification it also bears in Arabic, Syriac, and 
Ethiopic. It chiefly attracts notice as combined 
with the proper names of various places ; and 
in all such cases it points to some remarkable or 
important fountain near or at the spot. Thus, 
HJ"} 1 '!?, En-gedi, ' fountain of kids' [En-gedi] ; 
DOJ-py, En-gannim (Josh. xv. 34), ' fountain 
of the gardens ;' "lKT^y, E?i-dor, ' house-foun- 
tain ' (fans habitat ionis, Gesenius) [En-dor] ; 
mrrpy, En-haddah (Josh. xix. 21), ' sharp,' 
i. e. ' swift fountain ; ' DSD^O'^y, En-mishpai 
(Gen. xiv. 7), 'fountain of judgment;' there 
also called JJHp, but proleptically, as that name 
appears to have originated at a. later period 
(Num. xx. 13), [Kadesh]; D^tf-py, En- 
eglaim, ' fountain of two calves' (Ezek. xlvii. 10) 
[En-egi>aim] : fc^OS^'py, En-shemesh (Josh. xv. 

7), 'fountain of the sun;' ^3Tpy, En-rogel 
(2 Sam. xvii. 17, &c), literally ' fountain of the 
foot,' which is construed in the Targum ' fuller's 
fountain,' because the fullers there trod the cloths 
with their feet ; others, ' fountain of the spy T 
[En-rogei.]. There are other names with which- 
py is thus used in composition ; but these are 
the most important. In one case ^ occurs 
alone as the name of a place in the north-east of 
Palestine (Gesenius, Thescmr. in py. In th't 
plural it only occurs in the New Testament 
(John iii. 23) as jUnon (Alvdv), or fountains, as; 
in our Fountains Abbey in Yorkshire. 

AIR (a-np), the atmosphere, as opposed to the 
ether (alOrtp), or higher and purer region of the sky 
(Acts xxii. 24; 1 Thess. iv. 17; Rev. ii. 2; xvi 
17). The phrase els aepa \a\eiu — to speak into tin 
air (1- Cor. xiv. 9), is a proverbial expression to de- 
note speaking in vain, like ventis verba prof under l 
in Latin (Lucret. iv. 929), and a similar one iv, 
our own language ; and els aepa Sepeiy, to beat 
the air (1 Cor. ix. 26), denotes acting in vain,, 
and is a proverbial allusion to an abortive 
stroke into the air in pugilistic contests. The 
later Jews, in common with the Gentiles, espe the Pythagoreans, believed the air to be 
peopled with spirits, under the government of a. 
chief, who there held his seat of empire (Philo, 
31, 28; Diog. Laert. viii. 32). These spirits 
were supposed to be powerful, but malignant, and 
to incite men to evil. That the Jews held this 
opinion is plain from the Rabbinical citations of 
Lightfoot, Wetstein, &c. Thus in Pirke Aboth 
S3. 2, they are described as filing the ivhole air, 
arranged in troops, in regular subordination. The 
early Christian fathers entertained the same belief 
(Ignat. Ad Ephes. § 13), which has indeed come 
down to our own times. It is to this notion that 
St. Paul is supposed to allude in Eph. ii. 2, where 
Satan is called ccpx®" t?is e^ovffias rod aepos, 
1 prince of the power (i. e. of those who exercise 
the power) of the air.' Some, however, explain 
a/qp here by darkness, a sense which it bears also 
in profane writers. But the apostle no dotibt 
speaks according to the notions entertained by most 
of those to whom he wrote, without expressing the 

maketh the hind to calve, and discovereth the 
forests, 1 Bishop Lowth gives. ' The voice of the Lord 
striketh the Oak, and discovereth the forests,' which 
is also an improvement. 


extent of his own belief (see Lightfoot, Whitby, 
Koppe, Wetstein, and Bloomfield, in loc). 

AJALON (f6*N ; Sept. MaXtiv), a town and 
valley in the tribe of Dan (Josh. xix. 42), which 
was given to the Levites (Josh. xxi. 24 ; 1 Chron. 
vi. 69). It was not far from Bethshemesh 
(2 Chron. xxviii. IS), and was one of the places 
which Rehoboam fortified (2 Chron. xi. 10), and 
among the strongholds which the Philistines took 
from Ahaz (2 Chron. xxviii. 18). But the town, 
or rather the valley to which the town gave name, 
derives its chief renown from the circumstance 
that when Joshua, in pursuit of the five kings, ar- 
rived at some point near Upper Beth-horon, looking 
back upon Gibeon and down upon the noble valley 
before him, he uttered the celebrated command : 
' Sun, stand thou still on Gibeon, and thou moon, 
in the valley of Ajalon' (Josh. x. 12). From 
the indications of Jerome, who places Ajalon two 
Roman miles from Nicopolis, on the way to Je- 
rusalem, joined to the preservation of the ancient 
name in the form of Yalo, Dr. Robinson (Bibl. 
Researches, iii. 63) appears to have identified the 
valley and the site of the town. From a house- 
top in Beit Ur (Beth-horon) he looked down 
upon a broad and beautiful valley, which lay 
at his feet, towards Rami eh. This valley runs 
out west by north through a tract of hills, and 
•then bends off south-west through the great 
western plain. It is called Merj Ibn 'Omeir. 
Upon the side of the long hill which skirts the 
valley on the south, a small village was per- 
ceived, called Yalo, which cannot well be any 
othe'r than the ancient Ajalon ; and there can be 
little question that the broad wady to the north 
of it is the valley of the same name. 

AKKO. [Goat.] 

AKRABBIM (D^lpy r6j?0, ' Scorpion 
height; Sept. 'Avdpaais 'AKpa/3'iv), an ascent, 
hill, or chain of hills, which, from the name, 
would appear to have been much infested by 
scorpions and serpents, as some districts in that 
quarter certainly were (Deut. viii. 15 ; comp. 
Volney, ii. 256). It was one of the points which 
are only mentioned in describing the frontier-line 
of the Promised Land southward (Judg. i. 36). 
Shaw conjectures that Akrabbim may probably 
be the same with the mountains of Akabah, by 
which he understands the easternmost range of 
the opt], ' black mountains ' of Ptolemy, 
extending from Paran to Judaea. This range has 
lately become well known as the mountains of 
Edom, being those which bound the great valley 
of Arabah on the east {Travels, ii. 120). More 
specifically, he seems to refer Akrabbim to the 
southernmost portion of this range, near the for- 
tress of Akabah, and the extremity of the eastern 
gulf of the Red Sea ; where, as he observes, 
' from the badness of the roads, and many rocky 
passes that are to be surmounted, the Mohamme- 
dan pilgrims lose a number of camels, and are no 
less fatigued than the Israelites were formerly in 
getting over them.' Burckhardt (Syria, p. 509) 
reaches nearly the same conclusion, except that 
he rather refers ' the ascent of Akrabbim,' to foe 
acclivity of the western mountains from the plain 
of Akabah. This ascent is very steep, ' and has 
probably given to the place its name of Akabah, 
which means a cliff, or steep declivity.' The 
probability of this identification depends upon the 



question, whether the south-eastern frontier of 
Judah would be laid down so far to the south in 
the time of Moses and Joshua. If so, the identi- 
fication is fair enough ; but if not, it is of no 
weight or value in itself. The apparent analogy 
of names can be little else than accidental, when 
the signification in the two languages is altogether 

AKROTHINION QAxpoelviov). This Greek 
word, which occurs in Heb. vii. 4, means the 
best of the sjjoils. The Greeks, after a battle, 
were accustomed to collect the spoils into a 
heap, from which an offering was first made to 
the gods : this was the aKpoBiviov (Xenoph. Cyrop. 
vii. 5, 35 ; Herodot. viii. 121, 122; Pind. Nem. 
7, 58). In the first-cited case, Cyrus, after the 
taking of Babylon, first calls the magi, and com- 
mands them to choose the aKpoOivia of certain 
portions of the ground for sacred purposes. 

ALABASTER QAXa^affrpov). This word oc- 
curs in the New Testament only in the notice of 
the ' alabaster box,'' or rather vessel, of ' ointment 
of spikenard, very precious, 1 which a woman 
broke, and with its valuable contents anointed 
the head of Jesus, as he sat at supper in Bethany 
in the house of Simon the leper (Matt. xxvi. 7 ; 
Mark xiv. 3). AtAlabastron,in Egypt, there was a 
manufactory of small pots and vessels for holding 
perfumes, which were made from a stone found in 
the neighbouring mountains. The Greeks gave to 

these vessels the name of the city from which they 
came, calling them alabastrons. This name was 
eventually extended to the stone of whicli they 
were formed : and at length the term alabas- 
tra was applied without distinction to all per- 
fume vessels, of whatever materials they consisted. 
Theocritus speaks of golden alabastra, Tivpiw 
(xvpai xpiierei' aAdfiaffrpa (Idyl. xv. Ill : and 
perfume vessels of different kinds of stone, of 
glass, ivory, bone, and shells, have been !' und in 
the Egyptian tombs (Wilkinson, iii. 379). It 
does not, therefore, by any means follow that (he 
alabastron which the woman used at Bethany was 
really of alabaster: but a probability thai it was 
such arises from the fact (hat vessels made of 
this stone were deemed peculiarly suitable for the 
most costly and powerful perfumes (Pliu. Hist. 
Xat. xiii. 2; xxxvi. 8, 24). The woman is said 




'to have e broken ' the vessel ; which is explained 
by supposing that it v/as one of those shaped 
somewhat like a Florence oil-flask, with a long 
and narrow neck ; and the mouth being curiously 
and firmly sealed up, the usual and easiest way 
cf getting at the contents was to break off the 
u/per part of the neck. 

The alabastra were not usually made of that 
white and soft gypsum to which the name of. 
alabaster is now for the most part confined. Dr. 
John Hill, in his useful notes on Theophrastus 
sets this matter in a clear light : — ' The alabas- 
trum and alabastrites of naturalists, although 
by some esteemed synonymous terms, and by 
others confounded with one another, are dif- 
ferent substances. The alabastrum is properly 
the soft stone [the common "alabaster"] of a 
gypseous substance, burning easily into a kind of 
plaster ; and the alabastra, the hard, bearing a 
good polish, and approaching the texture of 
marble. This stone was by the Greeks called 
also sometimes onyx, and by the Latins marmor 
onychites, from its use in making boxes to pre- 
serve precious ointments ; which boxes were com- 
monly called, " onyxes " and " alabasters." Thus 
Dioscoride-, oAapacrpiTijs 6 KaXov^vos oVu|. 
And hence have arisen a thousand mistakes in the 
later authors, of less reading, who have misunder- 
stood Pliny, and confounded the onyx marble, as 
the alabaster was frequently called, with the pre- 
cious stone of that name.' 

This is now better understood. It is appre- 
hended that, from certain appearances common 
to both, the same name was given not only to the 
common alabaster, called by mineralogists gyp- 
sum, and by chemists sutyyhate of lime ; but also 
to the carbonate of lime, or that harder stone 
from which the alabastra were usually made, 
and which was often distinguished by the name 
of onyx alabaster, on account of the approach of 
its colour to that of the human finger-nails. 

ALAH (ilPN), the name of a tree, which, 
both in its singular and plural form, occurs often 
in the Scriptures. It is variously rendered in an- 
cient and modern versions — as oak, terebinth, 
teil (linden) tree, elm, and even plain. This 
has occasioned more of apparent perplexity than 
now really belongs to the subject. In the mas- 
culine singular (?*N) it occurs only in Gen. 
xiv. 6, in connection with Paran, or as jEZ-Paran. 
This the Sept. renders by terebinth (repefilvOov 
ttjs vapdv) ; Acpiila, Symmachus, and Theodo- 
tion by ' oak,' quercus ; and the Samaritan, 
Onkelos, Kimchi, Jerome, &c, by ' plain,' 
which is also adopted in the margin of our Bibles. 
The primary import of the word is strength, 
power ; whence some hold that it denotes any 
mighty tree, especially the terebinth and the 
oak. But the oak is not a mighty tree in 
Palestine ; and as it possesses its own distinct 
name [Ai.lon], which is shown, by the apposition 
of the names in Isa. vi. 13, and Hos. iv. 13, to 
denote a different tree from alah, one can have 
little hesitation in restricting the latter to the 
terebinth. Indeed, this conclusion has not been 
much questioned since it was shown by Celsius 
(Hierobotan. ii. 34-58) that the terebinth was 
most probably denoted by the Hebrew alah ; 

that the terebinth is the bufm j*hl of the Arabs ; 

and that the Arabian bufm is frequent in Pales- 
tine. The first position is of course incapable of 
absolute proof; the second has been confirmed 
by Forskal and Ehrenberg ; and the third is 
attested by a host of travellers, who speak of it 
under both names. Celsius exhibits the testimo- 
nies which existed in his time : to which those of 
Forskal, Hasselquist, and Dr. Robinson may now 
be added. The last-named traveller gives the best 
account of the tree as it is found in Palestine. At 
the point where the roads from Gaza to Jerusa- 
lem, and from Hebron to Ramleh, cross each 
other, and about midway between the two last- 
named towns, this traveller observed an immense 
but'm-tree, the largest he saw anywhere in Pales- 
tine. ' This species (Pistacia Terebinfhus) is, 
without doubt,' he adds, ' the terebinth of the 
Old Testament ; and under the shade of such a 
tree Abraham may well have pitched his tent at 

[Pistacia Teretrinthus.] 

Mamre. The but'm is not an evergreen, as is 
often represented ; but its small feathered lancet- 
shaped leaves fall in the autumn, and are renewed 
in the spring. The flowers are small, and fol- 
lowed by small oval berries, hanging in clusters 
from two to five inches in length, resembling 
much the clusters of the vine when the grapes are 
just set. From incisions in the trunk there is 
said to flow a sort of transparent balsam, consti- 
tuting a very pure and fine species of turpentine, 
with an agreeable odour, like citron or jessamine, 
and a mild taste, and hardening gradually into a 
transparent gum. In Palestine nothing seems to 
be now known of this product of the but'm. The 
free is found also in Asia Minor (many of them 
near Smj'rna), Greece, Italy, the south of 
France, Spain, and in the north of Africa ; and 
is described as not usually rising to the height of 
more than twenty feet. It often exceeded that 
size as we saw it in the mountains ; but here in 
the plains it was very much larger.' 

In Palestine aud the neighbouring countries 
the terebinth seems to be regarded with much the 
same distinction as the oak is in our northern lati- 


tudes. The tree is long-lived ; and it is certain 
that there were in the country ancient terebinths, 
renowned for. their real or supposed connection 
with scriptural incidents. Thus, about the time 
of Christ, there was at Mamre, near Hebron,_a 
venerable terebinth, which a tradition, old in 
the time of Josephus, alleged to be that (rendered 
' plain ' in our version of Gen. xiii. 18) under 
which Abraham pitched his tent; and which, 
indeed, was believed to be as old as the creation 
of the world (Joseph. Bell. Jud. iv. 9, 7). The 
later tradition was content to relate that it sprang 
from the staff of one of the angels who appeared 
there to Abraham (Gen. xviii. 2)._ Having, 
from respect to the memory of the patriarch, and 
as one of the spots consecrated by the presence 
of ' commissioned angels, 1 become a place of 
great resort and pilgrimage both of Jews and 
Christians, the Phoenicians, Syrians, and Ara- 
bians were attracted to it with commercial ob- 
jects ; and it thus became a great fair. At this fair 
thousands of captive Jews were sold for slaves by 
order of Hadrian in a.d. 135 (Jerome, Comm. in 
Zech. xi. 4, De Locis Ileb. 87 ; Hegesipp. iv. 17 ; 
Sozom. Hist. Eccles. ii. 4, 5 ; Niceph. viii. 30 ; 
Reland, Paleest p. 714). Being a placeof such 
heterogeneous assemblage, great abominations and 
scandals, religious and moral, arose, to which 
a stop was at length put by Eusebius of Caesarea 
'and the other bishops of Palestine, who, by 
order of Constantine, cast down all the pagan 
altars, and built a church by or under the tree. 
It is said that the tree dried up in the reign of 
Theodosius the Younger ; but that the still vital 
trunk threw off shoots and branches, and pro- 
duced a new tree, from which Brocard (vii. 64), 
Salignac (x. 5), and other old travellers declare 
that they brought slips of the new and old wood 
to their own country. Zuallart, who alleges that 
some of its wood was given to him by the 
monks at Jerusalem, candidly admits the diffi- 
culty of believing the stories which were told of 
its long duration : but he satisfies- himself with the 
authority of the authors we have mentioned, and 
concludes that God may have specially interfered 
to preserve it, with other old memorials, for his 
own glory and for our instruction {Voyage de 
Jerusalem, iv. 1). The tree was accidentally 
destroyed by fire in 1646 a.d. (Mariti, p. 520). 

ALCIMUS, or Jacimus ("AA/«/xos 6 KaVl&nei- 
fj.os, Joseph. Antiq. xii. 9. 3, Graecised forms of 
Eliakim and Joachim — names often interchanged 
in Hebrew), an usurping high-priest of the Jews 
in the time of Judas Maccabasus [Maccabees ; 
Priests, High]. 

t king is named in the opening of the first book of 
Maccabees, and is alluded to in the prophecies of 
Daniel. These, however, are not the principal rea- 
sons for giving his name a place in this work : he is 
chiefly entitled to notice here because his military 
career permanently affected the political state of 
the Jewish people, as well as their philosophy and 
literature. It is not our part, therefore, to detail 
even the ■outlines of his history, but to point out 
the causes and nature of this great revolution, and 
the influence which, formally through Alexander, 
Greece has exerted over the religious history of 
the West. 

The conquest of Western Asia by Greeks was 
so thoroughly provided for by predisposing causes, 



as to be no mere accident ascribable to Alexander 
as an individual. The wars which were carried 

on between Greece and Persia in the reigns of 
Darius, Xerxes, and Artaxerxes — from b.c. 490 
to B.C. 449 — sufficiently showed the decisive 
superiority in arms which the Greeks possessed, 
though no Greek as yet aspired to the conquest of 
Persia. Brave freemen, attached to their own 
soil, would not risk abandoning it for ever for the 
satisfaction of chasing their foe out of his home. 
But after the convulsions of the Peloponnesian 
War (b.c. 431-404) had filled Greece with exiles, 
whose sole trade was that of soldiers, a devoted 
standing army could be had for money. By the 
help of such mercenaries, Cyrus, younger brother 
of Artaxerxes II., attempted to seize the crown 
of Persia (b.c. 401) ; and although he was him- 
self slain, this, in its results (which cannot be here 
properly detailed), did but show more signal!)' that 
Greeks might force their way to the very palace 
of the great king, just as they afterwards trium- 
phantly retreated through the heart -of his empire. 
Soon after this, Agesilaus, king of Sparta, appears 
to have had serious designs of founding a Spartan 
province in Asia Minor, where he met with easy 
success ; but he was recalled by troubles at home 
(b.c. 394). About the year b.c. 374, Jason, the 
chief man of Pherse, in Thessaly, and virtually 
monarch of the whole province, having secured 
the alliance of Macedon, seriously meditated the 
conquest of the Persian empire ; and he (or his 
son) might probably have effected it, had he not 
been assassinated, b.c. 370. The generation who 
heard of that event witnessed the rise of Mace- 
don to supremacy under the great Philip, whose 
reign reached from b.c. 359 to b.c. 338. He too 
had proposed to himself the invasion and conquest 
of Persia as the end of all his campaigns and the 
reward of all his labours; and he too was suddenly 
taken off by the assassin's dagger. He was suc- 
ceeded by his greater son, for whom it was re- 
served to accomplish that of which Grecian 
generals had now for seventy years dreamed. It 
seems therefore clear that Greece was destined to 
overflow into Asia, even without Alexander ; fo» 
Persia was not likely to have such a series of able 
monarchs, and such an exemption from civil 
wars, as alone could have hindered the event. 
The personal genius of the Macedonia!] hem, 
however, determined the form and the suddenness 
of the conquest; and, in spite of his premature 
death, the policy which he pursued seems to have 
left some permanent effects. It is indeed possible 
that, in regard to the toleration of Oriental cus- 




toms and religions, no other policy than his could 
have held the empire together. Since the Romans 
in Asia and the British in India have followed 
the same procedure, any other Greek conquerors 
of Persia might have done the same had Alex- 
ander never existed. Be this as it may, it is 
certain that his conciliatory policy was copied 
by his successors for at least a century and a 

His respectful behaviour to the Jewish high- 
priest has been much dwelt on by Josephus (An- 
tiq. xi. 8, 4-6), a writer whose trustworthiness 
has been greatly overrated. Special reasons for 
questioning the story may be found in Thirlwall 
(Hist, of Greece, vi. 206) : but in fact, as it evi- 
dently rests on mere tradition, even a knowledge 
of human nature, and of the particular author, 
justifies large deductions from the picturesque 
tale. Some of the results, however, can hardly be 
erroneous, such as, that Alexander guaranteed to 
the Jews, not in Judaea only, but in Babylonia 
and Media, the free observance of their hereditary 
laws, and on this ground exempted them from 
tribute every seventh (or sabbatical) year. From 
the Romans in later times they gained the same 
indulgence, and it must no doubt have been en- 
joyed under the Persian king also, to whom they 
paid tribute at the time of Alexander's invasion. 
It is far from improbable then that the politic 
invader affected to have seen and heard the high- 
priest in a dream (as Josephus relates), and 
showed him great reverence, as to one who had 
declared ' that he would go before him and give 
the empire of Persia into his hand.' The pro- 
found silence observed concerning Judaea by all 
the historians of Alexander, at any rate proves 
that the Jews passed over without a struggle from 
the Persian to the Macedonian rule. 

Immediately after, he invaded and conquered 
Egypt, and showed to its gods the same respect as 
to those of Greece. Almost without a pause he 
founded the celebrated city of Alexandria (b.c. 
332), an event which, perhaps more than any 
other cause, permanently altered the state of the 
East, and brought about a direct interchange of 
mind between Greece, Egypt, and Judaea. Sidon 
had been utterly ruined by Artaxerxes Ochus 
(b.c. 351), and Tyre, this very year, by Alexan- 
der : the rise of a new commercial metropolis 
on the Mediterranean was thus facilitated ; and 
when the sagacious Ptolemy became master of 
Egypt (b.c. 323), that country presently rose to 
a prosperity which it never could have had under 
its distant and intolerant Persian lords. The 
Indian trade was diverted from its former course 
up the Euphrates into the channel of the Red 
Sea ; and the new Egyptian capital soon became 
a centre of attraction for Jews as well as Greeks. 
Under the dynasty of the Ptolemies the Hellenic 
race enjoyed such a practical ascendency (though 
on the whole to the benefit of the native Egyptians) 
that the influx of Greeks was of course immense. 
At the same time, owing to the proximity of the 
Egyptian religion, both the religion and the philo- 
sophy of the Greeks assumed here a modified 
form , and the monarchs, who were accustomed to 
tolerate and protect Egyptian superstition, were 
naturally very indulgent to Jewish peculiarities. 
Alexandria therefore became a favourite resort of 
the Jews, who here lived under their own laws, 
administered by a governor (idvapxns) of their own 

nation; but they learned the Greek tongue, and 
were initiated more or less into Greek philosophy. 
Their numbers were so great as to make them a 
large fraction of the whole city ; and out of their 
necessities arose the translation of the Old Testa- 
ment into Greek. The close connection which this 
Egyptian colony maintained with their brethren 
in Palestine produced various important mental 
and spiritual effects on the latter [Essenes]. 
The most accessible specimen of rhetorical mo- 
rality produced by the Hebrew culture of Greek 
learning is to be seen in the book called the Wis- 
dom of Solomon : the most elaborate development 
of Hebrew Platonism is contained in the works 
of Philo. In the writing called the Third Book 
of the Maccabees is a sufficiently unfavourable 
specimen of an attempt at rhetorical history, by -a 
mind educated in the same school. How deep 
an impress has been left on the Christian Church 
by the combination of Greek and Hebrew learning 
which characterized Alexandria, it needs many 
pages for the ecclesiastical historian to discuss. 
The Grecian cities afterwards built in northern 
Palestine [Decapolis] seem to have exerted little 
spiritual influence on the south ; for a strong re- 
pulsion existed in the strictly Jewish mind against 
both Samaria and Galilee. 

The tolerant policy of Alexander was closely 
followed by his great successor Seleucus, who ad- 
mitted the Jews to equal rights with Macedonians 
in all his new cities, even in his capital of Antioch 
(Joseph. Antiq. xii. 3, 1) ; and similar or greater 
liberality was exercised by the succeeding kings 
of that line, down to Antiochus Epiphanes [An- 
tiochus]. It can scarcely be doubted that on 
this to a great extent depended the remarkable 
westward migration of the Jews from Media and 
Babylon into Asia Minor, which went on silently 
and steadily until all the chief cities of those 
parts had in them the representatives of the twelve 
tribes. This again greatly influenced the planting 
of Christianity, the most favourable soil for which, 
during the time of its greatest purity, was in a 
Greek population which had previously received a 
Jewish culture. In passing we may remark, that 
we are unable to find the shadow of a reason for 
the popular assumption that the modern European 
Jews are descendants of the two more than of the 
other ten or eleven tribes. 

The great founder of Alexandria died in his 
thirty-second year, b.c. 323. The empire which 
he then left, to be quarrelled for by his generals 
comprised the whole dominions of Persia, with 
the homage and obedience of Greece superadded. 
But on the final settlement which took place after 
the battle of Ipsus (b.c. 301), Seleucus, the Greek 
representative of Persian majesty, reigned over a 
less extended district, than the last Darius. Not * 
only were Egypt and Cyprus severed from the 
eastern empire, but Palestine and Coelesyria also 
fell to their ruler, placing Jerusalem for nearly a 
century beneath an Egyptian monarch. On this 
subject, see further under Antiochus. 

The word Alexander means the helper or res- 
cuer of men, denoting military prowess. It is 
Homer's ordinary name for Paris, son of Priam, 
and was borne by two kings of Macedon before 
the great Alexander. The history of this con- 
queror is known to us by the works of Arrian and 
Quintus Curtius especially, besides the general 
sources for all Greek history. Neither of these 


wrote within four centuries of the death of 
Alexander ; but tliey had access to copious con- 
temporary narratives since lost. — F. W. N. 

2. ALEXANDER, suroamed BALAS, from 
his mother Bala, a personage who figures in the 
history of the Maccabees and in Josephus. His 
extraction, is doubtful ; but he professed to be the 



natural son of Antiocbus Epiphanes, and in that 
capacity, out of ojiposition to Demetrius Soter, 
he was recognised as king of Syria by the king of 
Egypt, by the Romans, and eventually by Jonathan 
Maccabaras, on the part of the Jews. The degree 
of strength and influence which the Jewish chief 
possessed, was sufficient to render his adhesion 
valuableto either party in the contest for the throne. 
As lie was obliged to take a side, and had reason 
to distrust the sincerity of Demetrius, Jonathan 
yielded to the solicitations of Alexander, who, on 
arriving at Ptolemais, sent him a purple robe and 
a crown- of gold, to induce him to espouse his cause 
(1 Mace. x. 18). Demetrius was not long after 
slain in battle, and Balas obtained possession of 
the kingdom. He then sought to strengthen him- 
self by a marriage with the king of Egypt's 
daughter. This marriage was celebrated at Pto- 
lemais, and was- attended by Jonathan, who re- 
ceived marks of high consideration from the 
Egyptian (Ptolemy Philomf/or) and Syrian kings 
(I Mace. 51-56 ; Joseph. Antiq. xiii. 4). Pros- 
perity ruined Alexander •, lie soon abandoned 
himself to voluptuousness and debauchery, leav- 
ing the government in the hands of ministers 
whose misrule rendered his reign odious. This 
encouraged Demetrius Nicator, the eldest son of 
the late Demetrius Soter, to appear in arms, and 
claim his father's crown. Alexander took the 
field against him; and in the brief Avar that fol- 
lowed, although his father-in-law Ptolemy (who 
had his own designs upon Syria) abandoned his 
cause, Jonathan remained faithful to him, and 
rendered him very important services, which the 
king rewarded by bestowing on him a golden 
chain, such as princes only wore, and by giving 
him possession of Ekron (' AKtcapdv) . The defec- 
tion of the Egyptian king, however, was fatal to 
the cause of Balas ; lie was defeated in a pitched 
battle, and lied with 50!) cavalry to Abae in Ara- 
bia, and sought refuge with the emir Zabdiel. 
The Arabian murdered his confiding guest in the 
fifth year of Ins reign over Syria, and sent his head 
to Ptolemy, who himself died the same year, b.c. 
145. Balas left a young son, who was eventually 
made king of Syria by Tryphon, under the name 
of Antiochus Theos (1 Mace. xi. 13-18 ; Joseph. 
Antiq. xiii. 4). 

3. ALEXANDER JANNyEUS, the first 
prince of the Maccaba?an dynasty who assumed 
the title of king [Maccabees]. 

4. ALEXANDER, son of Herod the Great and 
Marianne [Herodian Family]. 

5. ALEXANDER, a Jew of Ephesus, known 
only from the part he took in the uproar about 
Diana, which was raised there by the preaching of 
Paul. As the inhabitants confounded the Jews- 
and Jewish Christians} the former put forward 
Alexander to speak on their behalf, but he was- 
unable in the tumult to obtain a hearing (Acts 
xix. 33). Some suppose that this person is the 
same with 'Alexander the coppersmith,' of 2 Tim. 
iv. 14, but this is by no means probable : the 
name of Alexander was in those times very 
common among the Jews. 

<L ALEXANDER, a coppersmith or brazier 
(mentioned in 1 Tim. i. 20; 2 Tim. iv. 14), who 
with Hymenseus and others broached certain he- 
resies touching the resurrection, for which they 
were excommunicated by St. Paul. These persons, 
and especially Alexander, appear to have maligned 
the faith they had forsaken, and the character 
of the apostle. As every Jew learned some trade, it 
has been imagined that Alexander was really a man 
of learning, and not an artizan, although acquainted 
with the brazier's craft. But we are not aware 
that it was usual to designate a literate person 
by the name of the trade with which he was ac- 
quainted, although this may possibly have been 
the case when a man bore a name so common and 
so undistinguishing as that of Alexander. 

ALEXANDRE, or SALOME, wife of Alex- 
ander Jannaeus [Maccabees]. 

ALEXANDRIA ('AA^dvSpeia, 3 Mace. iii. 
1, 21), the chief maritime city, and long the 
metropolis of Lower Egypt. As this city owed 
its foundation to Alexander the Great, the Old 
Testament canon bad closed before it existed ; 
nor is it often mentioned in the Apocrypha, or 
in the New Testament. But it was in many ways 
most importantly connected with the later history 
of the Jews — as well from the relations which 
subsisted between them and the Ptolemies, who 
reigned in that city, as from the vast numbers 
of Jews who were settled there, with whom a 
constant intercourse was maintained by the Jews 
of Palestine. It is perhaps safe to say that, from 
the foundation of Alexandria to the destruction 
of Jerusalem, and even after, the former was of all 
foreign places that to which the attention of the 
Jews was most directed. And this appears to 
have been true even at the time when Antioch 
first, and afterwards Rome, became the seat of 
the power to which the nation was subject. 

Alexandria is situated on the Mediterranean, 
twelve miles west, of the Cauopic mouth of 
the Nile, in 31° 13' N. lat. and 26° 53' E. 
long. It owes its origin to the comprehensive 
policy of Alexander, who perceived that the 
usual channels of commerce might be advanta- 
geously altered ; and that a city occupying this 
site could not fail to become the common empo- 
rium for the traffic of the eastern and western 
worlds, by means of the river Nile, and the two 
adjacent seas, the Red Sea and the Mediterranean : 
and the high prosperity which, as such. Alexandria 
very rapidly attained, proved (lie soundness of his 
judgment, and exceeded any expectations which 
even he could have entertained. For a long period 
Alexandria was the greatest of known cities ; for 
Nineveh and Babylon had fallen, and Some had 
not yet risen to pre-eminence : and even when 



Rome became the mistress of the world, and 
Alexandria only the metropolis of a province, the 
latter was second only to the former in wealth, ex- 
tent, and importance ; and was honoured with 
the magnificent titles of the second metropolis of 
the world, the city of cities, the queen of the 
East, a second Rome (Diod. Sic. xvii. ; Strab. 
xvii. ; Ammian. Marcell. xxii.; Hegesipp. iv. 27 ; 
Joseph. Bell. Jud. iv. 11, 5). 

The city was founded in b.c. 332, and was 
built under the superintendence of the same 
architect (Dinocrates) who had ' rebuilt the 
Temple of Diana at Ephesus. As a foreign 
city, not mentioned at all in the Old Testa- 
ment, and only accidentally in the New 
(Acts vi. 9 ; xviii. 24 ; xxvii. 6), it is intro- 
duced into this work oidy on account of its con- 
nection with the history and condition of the 


Jewish people. To the facts resulting from or 
bearing on that connection, our notice must there- 
fore be limited, without entering into those de- 
scriptions of the ancient or of the modern city 
which are given in general and geographical cyclo- 
paedias. It may suffice to mention that the ancient 
city appears to have been of seven times the extent 
of the modern. If we may judge from the length 
of the two main streets (crossing each other at right 
angles) by which it was intersected, the city was 
about four miles long by one and «. half wide : and 
in the time of Diodorus it contained a free popu- 
lation of 300,000 persons, and altogether pro- 
bably 600,000, if we double the former number, as 
Mannert suggests, in order to include the slaves. 
The port of Alexandria is described by Josephus 
{Bell. Jud. iv. 10, 5); and his description is in 
perfect conformity with the best modern accounts. 

It was secure, but difficult of access ; in conse- 
quence of which, a magnificent pharos, or light- 
house, was erected upon an islet at the entrance, 
which was connected with the mainland by a 
dyke. This pharos was accounted one of the 
' seven ' wonders of the world. It was begun by 
Ptolemy Soter, and completed under Ptolemy 
Philadelphus, by Sostratus of Cuidus, b.c. 283. 
It was a square structure of white marble, on the 
top of which fires were kept constantly burning 
for the direction of mariners. It was erected at a 
cost of S00 talents, which, if Attic, would amount 
to 1 65,000Z., if Alexandrian, to twice that sum. 
It was a wonder in those times, when such erec- 
tions were almost unknown ; but, in itself, the 
Eddystone lighthouse is, in all probability, ten 
times more wonderful. 

The business of working out the great design 
of Alexander could not have devolved on a more 
fitting person than Ptolemy Soter. From his first 
arrival in Egypt, he made Alexandria his resi- 

dence : and no sooner had he some respite from 
war, than he bent all the resources of his mind to 
draw to his kingdom the whole trade of the East, 
which the Tyrians had, up to his time, carried on 
by sea to Elath, and from thence, by the way of 
Rhinocorura, to Tyre. He built a city on the 
west side of the Red Sea, whence he sent out fleets 
to all those countries to which the Phoenicians 
traded from Elath. But, observing that the Red 
Sea, by reason of rocks and shoals, was very danger- 
ous towards its northern extremity, he transferred 
the trade to another city, which he founded at the 
greatest practicable distance southward. This 
port, which was almost on the borders of Ethiopia, 
he called, from his mother, Berenice ; but the 
harbour being found inconvenient, the neighbour- 
ing city of Myos Hormos was preferred. Thither 
the products of the east and south were conveyed 
by sea ;' and were from thence taken on camels to 
Coptus, on the Nile, where they were again 
shipped for Alexandria, and from that city were 


dispersed into all the nations of the west, in ex- 
change for merchandise which was afterwards 
exported to the East (Strabo, xxii. p. 805 ; Plin. 
Hist. Nat. vi. 23). By these means, the whole 
trade was fixed at Alexandria, which thus became 
the chief mart of all the traffic between the East 
and West, and which continued to be the greatest 
emporium in the world for above seventeen cen- 
turies, until the discovery of the passage by the 
Cape of Good Hope opened another channel for 
the commerce of the East. 

Alexandria became not only the seat of com- 
merce, but of learning and the liberal sciences. 
This distinction also it owed to Ptolemy Soter, 
himself a man of education, who founded an aca- 
demy, or society of learned men, who devoted them- 
selves to the study of philosophy, literature, and 
science. For their use he made a collection of 
choice books, which, by degrees, increased under 
his successors until it became the finest library in 
the world, and numbered 700,000 volumes (Strab. 
xvii. p. 791; Euseb. Chron.) It sustained repeated 
losses, by fire and otherwise, but these losses were 
as repeatedly repaired ; and it continued to be 
of great fame and use in those parts, until it 
was at length burnt by the Saracens when they 
made themselves masters of Alexandria in a.d. 642. 
Undoubtedly the Jews at Alexandria shared in 
the benefit of these institutions, as the Christians 
did afterwards ; for the city was not only a seat of 
heathen, but of Jewish, and subsequently of Chris- 
tian learning. The Jews never had a more pro- 
foundly learned man than Philo,nor the Christians 
men more erudite than Origen and Clement ; and 
if we may judge from these celebrated natives of 
Alexandria, who were remarkably intimate with 
the heathen philosophy and literature — the learn- 
ing acquired in the Jewish and Christian schools 
of that city must have been of that broad and com- 
prehensive character which its large and ' liberal 
institutions were fitted to produce. It will be 
remembered that the celebrated translation of 
the Hebrew Scriptures into Greek [Septuagint] 
was made, under every encouragement from Pto- 
lemy Philadelphus, principally for the use of the 
Jews in Alexandria, who knew only the Greek 
language ; but partly, no doubt, that the great 
library might possess a version of a book so re- 
markable, and, in some points, so closely con- 
nected with the ancient history of Egypt. The 
work of Josephus against Apion affords ample 
evidence of the attention which the Jewish Scrip- 
tures excited. 

At its foundation Alexandria was peopled less 
by Egyptians than by colonies of Greeks, Jews, and 
other foreigners. The Jews, however much their 
religion was disliked, were valued as citizens; and 
every encouragement was held out by Alexan- 
der himself and by his successors in Egypt, to in- 
duce them to settle in the new city. The same 
privileges as those of the first class of inhabit- 
ants (the Greeks) were accorded to them, as well 
as the free exercise of their religion and peculiar 
usages : and this, with the protection and security 
Which a powerful state afforded against the perpe- 
tual conflicts and troubles of Palestine, and with 
the inclination^ o traffic, which had been acquired 
during the Captivity, gradually drew such im- 
mense numbers of Jews to Alexandria, that they 
eventually formed a very large portion of its vast 
population, and at the same time constituted a 



most thriving and important section of the Jewish 
nation. The Jewish inhabitants of Alexandria are 
therefore often mentioned in the later history of 
the nation ; and their importance as a section of 
that nation would doubtless have been more fre- 
quently indicated, had not the Jews of Egypt 
thrown off their ecclesiastical dependence upon 
Jerusalem and its temple, and ffirmed a separate 
establishment of their own, at On or Heliopolis 
[On; Onias]. This left them less inducement 
or occasion than they would otherwise have had 
to mix themselves up with the affairs of the pa- 
rent country : but they were not wanting in be- 
coming patriotism ; and they were on more than 
one occasion involved in measures directed against 
the Jews as a nation, and occasionally expe- 
rienced some effects of that anger in the ruling 
powers, or of exasperation in the populace, of 
which the Jews in Palestine were the primary 
objects, or which resulted from the course which 
they had taken. 

The inhabitants of Alexandria were divided 
into three classes : 1. The Macedonians, the ori- 
ginal founders of the city ; 2. the mercenaries who 
had served under Alexander ; 3. the native Egyp- 
tians. Through the favour of Alexander and Ptole- 
my Soter, the Jews were admitted into the first of 
these classes, and this privilege was so important 
that it had great effect in drawing them to the new 
city (Hecatajus, in Joseph. Contra Apion. 1. ii. ; 
Bell. Jud. ii. 36 ; Q. Curt. iv. 8). These privi- 
leges they enjoyed undisturbed until the time> of 
Ptolemy Philopator, who, being exasperated at 
the resistance he had met with in attempting to 
enter the temple at Jerusalem, wreaked his wrath 
upon the Jews of Alexandria, on his return to 
Egypt. He reduced to the third or lowest class 
all but such as would consent to offer sacrifices 
to the gods he worshipped ; but of the whole body 
only 300 were found willing to abandon their prin- 
ciples in order to preserve their civil advantages. 
The act of the general body in excluding the 300 
apostates from their congregations was so repre- 
sented to the king as to move his anger to the 
utmost, and he madly determined to exterminate 
all the Jews in Egypt.- Accordingly, as many 
as could be found were brought together, and shut 
up in the spacious hippodrome of the city, with 
the intention of letting loose 500 elephants upon 
them ; but the animals refused their horrid task, 
and, turning wildly upon the spectators and 
the soldiers,- destroyed large numbers of them. 
This, even to the king, who was present, seemed 
so manifest an interposition of Providence in 
favour of the Jews, that he not only restored their 
privileges, but loaded them with new favours. 
This story, as it is omitted by Josephus and other 
writers, and oidy found in the third book of 
Maccabees (ii.-v.), is considered doubtful. 

The dreadful persecution which the Jews of 
Alexandria underwent in a.d. 39, shtnvs that, 
notwithstanding their long establishment there, 
no friendly relations had arisen between them 
and the other inhabitants, by whom in fact they 
were intensely hated. This feeling was so well 
known, that at the date indicated, the Roman 
governor Avillius Flaccus, who was anxious to in- 
gratiate himself with the citizens, was persuaded 
that the surest way of winning their affections 
was to withdraw his protection from the Jews, 
against whom the emperor was already exaspe- 




rated by their refusal to acknowledge his right 
to divine honours, which he insanely claimed, 
or to admit his images into their synagogues. 
The Alexandrians soon found out that they would 
not be called to account for any proceedings they 
might have recourse to against the Jews. The in- 
sult and bitter mockery with which they treated 
Herod Agrippa when he came to Alexandria, be- 
fore proceeding to take possession of the kingdom 
, he had received from Caligula, gave the first inti- 
mation of their dispositions. Finding that the 
governor connived at their conduct, they pro- 
ceeded to insist that the emperor's images should 
be introduced into the Jewish synagogues ; and 
on resistance being offered, they destroyed most 
of them, and polluted the others by introducing 
the imperial images by force. The example thus 
set by the Alexandrians was followed in other cities 
of Egypt, which contained at this time about a 
million of Jews ; and a vast number of oratories 
■ — of which the largest and most beautiful were 
called synagogues — were all either levelled with 
the ground, consumed • : *>y fire, or profaned by 
the emperor's statues (Philo, In Flacc. p. 968- 
1009, ed. 16 10 ; Be Leg. ix. ; Euseb. Chron. 
27, 28). 

Flaccus soon after declared himself operdy, by 
publishing an edict depriving the Jews of the 
rights of citizenship, which they had so long en- 
joyed, and declaring them aliens. The Jews 
then occupied two out of the five quarters (which 
took their names from the five first letters of the 
alphabet) into which the city was divided ; and 
as they were in those times, before centuries of 
oppression had broken their spirit, by no means 
remarkable for their submission to wrongous 
treatment, it is likely that they made some efforts 
towards the maintenance of their rights, which 
Philo neglects to record, but. which gave some 
kind of pretence for the excesses which followed. 
At all events, the Alexandrians, regarding them 
as abandoned by the authorities to their rnercy, 
openly proceeded to the most violent extremities. 
The Jews were forcibly driven out of all the 
other parts of the city, and confined to one quar- 
ter ; and the houses from which they had been 
driven, as well as their shops and warehouses, 
were plundered of all their effects. Impoverished, 
and pent up in a narrow corner of the city, where 
the greater part were obliged to lie in the open air, 
and where the supplies of food were cut off, many 
of them died of hardship and hunger ; and who- 
ever was found beyond the boundary, whether he 
had escaped from the assigned limits, or had 
come in from the country, was seized and put 
to death with horrid tortures. So likewise, when 
a vessel belonging to Jews arrived in port, it was 
boarded by the mob, pillaged, and then burnt, 
together with the owners. 

At length king Herod Agrippa, who stayed long 
enough in Alexandria to see the beginning of 
these atrocities, transmitted to the emperor such a 
report of the real state of affairs as induced him to 
send a centurion to arrest Flaccus, and bring him 
a prisoner to Rome. This put the rioters in a false 
position, and brought some relief to the Jews ; but 
the tumult still continued, and as the magistrates 
refused to acknowledge the citizenship of the 
Jews, it was at length agreed that both parties 
should send delegates, five on each side, to Rome, 
and refer the decision of the controversy to the em- 

peror. At the head of the Jewish delegation was 
the celebrated Philo, to whom we owe the account 
of these transactions ; and at the head of the Alex- 
andrians was the noted Apion. The latter chiefly 
rested their case upon the fact that the Jews were 
the only people who refused to consecrate images 
to the emperor, or to swear by his name. But on this 
point the Jewish delegates defended themselves so 
well, that Caligula himself said, ' These men are not 
so wicked as ignorant and unhappy, in not believ- 
ing me to be a god !' The ultimate result of this 
appeal is not known, but the Jews of Alexandria 
continued to be harassed during the remainder of 
Caligula's reign ; and their alabarch Alexander 
Lysimachus (brother of Philo) was thrown into 
prison, where he remained till he was discharged by 
Claudius, upon whose accession to the empire the 
Alexandrian Jews betook themselves to arms. Thi3 
occasioned such disturbances that they attracted 
the attention of the emperor, who, at the joint en- 
treaty of Herod and Agrippa, issued an edict con- 
ferring on the Jews of Egypt all their ancient privi- 
leges (Philo, In Flacc. Op. p. 1019-1043 ; Joseph. 
Antiq. xviii. 10; xix. 4). The state of feeling 
in Alexandria winch these facts indicate, was very 
far from being allayed when the revolt of the Jews 
in Palestine caused even those of the nation who 
dwelt in foreign parts to be regarded as enemies, 
both by the populace and the government. In 
Alexandria, on a public occasion, they were at- 
tacked, and those who could not save themselves 
by flight were put to the sword. Only three were 
taken alive, and they were dragged through the 
city to be consigned to the flames. At this spec- 
tacle the indignation of the Jews rose beyond all 
bounds. They first assailed the Greek citizens with 
stones, and then rushed with lighted torches to the 
amphitheatre, to set it on fire and burn all the 
people who were there assembled. The Roman 
prefect Tiberius Alexander, finding that milder 
measures were of no avail, sent against them a 
body of 17,000 soldiers, who slew about 50,000 of 
them, and plundered and burned their dwellings 
(Joseph. Bell. Jncl. ii. 18. 7 ; comp. Matt.xxiv. 6). 
After the close of the war in Palestine, new 
disturbances were excited in Egypt by the Sicarii, 
many of whom had fled thither. They endea- 
voured to persuade the Jews to acknowledge no 
king but God, and to throw oft' the Roman yoke. 
Such persons as opposed their designs and ten- 
dered wiser counsels to their brethren, they secretly 
assassinated, according to their custom. But the 
principal Jews in Alexandria having in a general 
assembly earnestly warned the people against 
these fanatics, who had been the authors of all 
the troubles in Palestine, about 600 of them were 
delivered up to the Romans. Several fled into 
the Thebaid, but were apprehended and brought 
back. The most cruel tortures which could be 
devised had no effect in compelling them to ac- 
knowledge the emperor for their sovereign ; and 
even their children seemed endowed with souls 
fearless of death, and bodies incapable of pain. 
Vespasian, when informed of these transactions, 
sent orders that the Jewish temple in Egypt should 
be destroyed. Lupus the prefect, however, only 
shut it up, after having taken out the consecrated 
gifts : but his successor Paulinus' stripped it com- 
pletely, and excluded the Jews entirely from it. 
This was in a.d. 75, being the 343rd year from 
its erection by Onias. 


St. Mark is said to have introduced the 
Christian religion into Alexandria, which early 
became one of the strongholds of the true faith. 
The Jews continued to form a principal portion of 
the inhabitants, and remained in the enjoyment 
of their civil rights till a.d. 415, when they in- 
curred the hatred of Cyril the patriarch, at whose 
instance they were expelled, to the number of 
40,000, and their synagogues destroyed. How- 
ever, when Amrou, in a.d. 640, took the place for 
the caliph Omar, he wrote to his master in these 
terms : — ' I have taken the great city of the west, 
which contains 4000 palaces, 4000 baths, 400 the- 
atres, 12,000 shops for the sale of vegetable food, 
and 40,000 tributary Jews.'' From that time the 
prosperity of Alexandria very rapidly declined ; 
and when, in 969, the Fatemite caliphs seized on 
Egypt and built New Cairo, it sunk to the rank 
of a secondary Egyptian city. The discovery of 
the passage to the East by the Cape, in 1497, 
almost annihilated its remaining commercial im- 
portance ; and although the commercial and ma- 
ritime enterprises of Mehemet &X\ have again 
raised it to some distinction, Alexandria must still 
be accounted as one of those great ancient cities 
whose glory has departed. When Benjamin of 
Tudela visited the place (Itin. i. 158, ed. Asher), 
the number of Jews was not more than 3000, and 
does not now exceed 500 (J. A. St. John, Egypt, 
ii. 384). The whole population at the present 
time (1843) is between 36,000 and 40,000, of 
whom 4876 are foreigners (Hogg's Visit to Alex- 
andria, i. 101). 

ALEXANDRIUM, a castle built by Alex- 
ander Jannoeus on a mountain near Corea? 
(Kopeai), one- of the principal cities of northern- 
most Judaea towards Samaria. The princes of 
the founder's family were mostly buried here ; 
and hither Herod carried the remains of his sons 
Alexander and Aristobulus (who were maternally 
of that family), after they had been put to death 
at Se'oaste (Josejih. Antiq. xiii. 24 ; xiv. 6, 10, 27 ; 
xvi. 2, et ult.y. The situation of Corese, which 
determines that of the castle, is not known ; but 
Dr. Robinson (Bib. Researches, iii. 83) conjectures 
that he may have found it in the modern Kuriyzet, 
■which is about eight miles S. by E. from Nabulus 
(Shechem). But this place, we imagine, is too far 
north to have been within even the northernmost 
limits of Judaea. 

ALG-UM (D^-IJpN), or Almug Trees 
( CilTp?!?? )- These are, no doubt, two forms 
of the same word, as they occur in passages re- 
ferring to the same events, and differ only in the 
transposition of letters. In 1 Kings x. 11, it is 
6aid, ' And the navy also of Hiram, that brought 
gold from Ophir, brought in from Ophir great 
plenty of almug-trees and precious stones. And 
the king made of the almug-trees pillars for the 
house of the Lord, and for the king's house, 
harps also and psalteries for singers.' In the pa- 
rallel passages of 2 Chron. ix. 10, 11, the word 
algum is substituted for almug, and it is added, 
' There were none such seen before in the land of 
Judah.' As no similar name has yet been disco- 
vered which is applicable to any kind of wood 
from the countries whence the almug-trees are 
supposed to have been brought, various conjec- 
tures have been formed respecting them. It is 
' necessary first to settle whence these trees were 



brought. To us there appears no doubt that 
Ophir was to the southward of the Red Sea, and 
was most probably in some part of India (Pic- 
torial Bible, ii. 349-366). The products brought 
from thence, such as gold, precious stones, ivory, 
apes, and peacocks, were all procurable only from 
that country. Even tin, obtained at a later period 
from Tartessus, was probably first procured from an 
earlier Tarshish, as it is abundant in Tennaserim, 
the Malayan peninsula, the island of Banca, &c. 
Its uses were well known to the Indians, who re- 
ceived it also in exchange when brought to them 
by the Red Sea, as it no doubt was, at the time 
when the Periplus of the Erythraean Sea was 

Various trees have been attempted to be iden- 
tified with the almug. These it is unnecessary to 
enumerate at length, as only a few of them seem 
deserving of attention. The Greek translator of 
the book of Kings explains the Hebrew word by 
EuAa direXtKriTa, ' unhewn wood ;' but in both the 
places in Chronicles it is rendered "EvXa irevKiva, 
'pine-wood.' This is also the interpretation of 
the old Latin version at 2 Chron. ii. 8 ; but in 
the two other passages that version gives it the ac- 
ceptation of ' thyine-wood ' (Ligna thyina). The 
thyine-wood which is mentioned in Rev. xviii. 12, 
is no doubt the Lignum thyinum, which was also 
called citrinum, citron-wood. It was highly valued 
by the Romans, and employed by them for the 
doors of their temples and the images of their gods. 
This wood was obtained from the north of Africa, 
where the tree producing it has recently been re- 
discovered. If algum-wood was brought from 
the north coast of Africa, there certainly does not 
appear any tree more worthy to be considered 
as such than Thuya articulata, or Callitris qua- 
drivalvis [Thyine Wood]. From the passage 
of 2 Chron. ii. 8 : — ' Send me also cedar-trees, 
fir-trees, and algum-trees out of Lebanon,' it 
has been inferred that this might be one of 
the pine tribe procurable in that mountain : but 
in the parallel passage in 1 Kings v. 8, only 
timber of cedar and timber of fir are mentioned. 
On this Rosenm idler observes, ' that the addi- 
tion of " almug" in the book of Chronicles 
appears to have been the interpolation of a 
transcriber' (Bibl. Bot. p. 245). If the almug 
had been a free of Lebanon, we should have a 
difficulty in understanding how, after the time 
of Solomon, ' there came no such almug-trees, 
nor were such seen unto this day' (1 Kings 
x. 12). 

-We feel satisfied, however, that almug-trees 
were brought from southern regions by the Red 
Sea ; and it could not have been more difficult 
to convey them from thence to the Mediterranean 
than it must have been to transport timber from 
Joppa to Jerusalem. If we consider the great de- 
ficiency of timber on the coasts both of Arabia 
and of Egypt — a deficiency which, from the ge- 
neral dryness of the soil and climate, must have 
been experienced hi remote ages, as well as at the 
present time — we should expect that, where we 
have notices of so much shipping, there must 
early have been established a trade in timber. 
Forskal particularly mentions the importation of 
timber-woods from India into Arabia. Of the kinds 
enumerated, it has been shown that saj. abnoos, and 
shishum are teak, ebony, and sissoo (Essay on 
Hindoo Medicine, p. 128). Forskal also mentions 




the Teak as imported into Egypt : c Carina navis 
fundatur Ligno saj *Xui ex India allato,' p. lvi. 

Having been brought from so great a distance, 
and thought sufficiently remarkable to be worthy 
of special record, it is reasonable to suppose 
that almug-trees possessed properties not common 
in the timber usually met with in Palestine, 
whether in appearance, in colour, or in odour. 
Several Indian trees have been enumerated as 
likely to have been the almug. Of these, bukkum, 
or sapanwood (Ccesalpinia sappaii), much used 
in dyeing, belongs to the same genus as the Brazil- 
wood of South America, but its nearest locality 
is the eastern side of the Bay of Bengal. The 
teak, highly valued from its indestructible nature, 
great size, and strength, might be more reasonably 
adduced, because more easily procurable, from 
the greater accessibility of the Malabar coast; but 
being a coarse-grained wood, it might not be so 
well suited for musical instruments. If one of 
the pine tribe be required, none is more deserving 
of selection than the deodar (deo, god ; dar, 
wood : Pinus deodara), as it grows to a large size, 
yields excellent timber, which is close-grained 
and fragrant ; but the tree is found only in very 
inaccessible situations. 

Others have been in favour of sandal-wood, but 
have confounded with the true and far-famed kind 
what is called red sandal-wood, the product of 
Tterocarpus santalinm, as well as of A denanthera 
pavonina. But there are two kinds of fragrant 
sandal-wood, the yellow and the white, both men- 
tioned in old works on Materia Medica. Both 
these are thought by some to be the produce of 
the same tree, the younger and outer layers of 
wood forming the white, while the centre layers 
become coloured, and form the yellow. 

Recent investigations confirm the opinion of 
Garcias, that the yellow and white sandal-woods 
are the produce of different trees, both of which, 
however, belong to the same genus, Santalum. 
M. Gaudichaud has described the species, which 
he has named S. Freycinetianum, as that yield- 
ing the yellow sandal-wood so much valued by 
the Chinese, and obtained by them from the 
Feejee, Marquesas, and Molucca Islands. 

But the most common sandal-wood is that 
which is best known and most highly esteemed in 
India. It is produced by the Santalum album, 
a native of the moiintainous parts of the coast of 
Malabar, where large quantities are cut for export 
to China, to different parts of India, and to the 
Persian and Arabian gulfs . The outer parts of this 
tree are white and without odour ; the parts near 
the root are most fragrant, especially of such trees 
as grow in hilly situations and stony ground. 
The trees vary in diameter from 9 inches to a 
foot, and are about 25 or 30 feet in height, but 
the stems soon begin to branch. This wood is 
white, fine-grained, and agreeably fragrant, and is 
much employed for making rosaries, fans, ele- 
v gant boxes and cabinets. The Chinese use it also 
as incense both in their temples and private 
bouses, and burn long slender candles formed 
by covering the ends of sticks with its sawdust 
mixed with rice-paste. 

As sandal-wood has been famed in the East 
from very early times, it is more likely than any 
other to have attracted the notice of, and been 
desired by, more northern nations. We do not, 

however, trace it by its present or any similar 
name at a very early period in the writings of 

[Santalum album._ 

Greek authors : it may, however, have been con- 
founded with agila-wood, or agallochum, which, 
like it, is a fragrant wood and used as incense. 
Sandal-wood is mentioned in early Sanscrit works, 
and also in those of the Arabs. Actuarius is the 
earliest Greek author that expressly notices it, but 
he does so as if it had been familiarly known. In 
the Periplus of Arrian it is mentioned as one of the 
articles of commerce obtainable at Omana, in Ge- 
drosia, by the name "EvXa 'Sayd.Mva, which Dr. 
Vincent remarks may easily have been corrupted 
from ~2av§i\iva. As it was produced on the 
Malabar coast, it could easily be obtained by the 
merchants who conveyed the cinnamon of Ceylon 
and other Indian products to the Mediterranean. 
That sandal-wood has often been employed in 
buildings is evident from J. Barb, ' Viaggio alia 
Persia :' ' La porta della camera ora de sandali 
entarsiata con file d'oro,' &c. The Hindoo temple 
of Somnat, in Guzerat; which was plundered 
and destroyed by Mahomed of Ghizni, had gates 
made of sandal-wood. These were carried off by 
the conqueror, and afterwards formed the gates of 
his tomb, whence, after 800 years, they were 
taken by the British conquerors of Ghizni, and 
brought back to India in 1S42. 

That sandal-wood, therefore, might have attained 
celebrity, even in very early ages, is not at all 
unlikely; that it should have attracted the notice 
of Phoenician merchants visiting the west coast of 
India is highly probable; and also that they should 
have thought it worthy of being taken as a part of 
their cargo on their return from Ophir. That it is 
well calculated for musical instruments, the au- 
thor is happy to adduce the opinion of Professor 
Wheatstone, who says, ' I know no reason why 
sandal-wood should not have been employed in 
ancient days for constructing musical instruments. 
It is not so employed at present, because there are 
many much cheaper woods which present a far 
handsomer appearance. Musical instruments 
would appear very unfinished to modern taste 
unless varnished or French-polished, and it would 
be worse than useless to treat flagrant woods in 
this way. Formerly perhaps it might have been 


more the fashion to delight the senses of smell and 
hearing simultaneously than it is with us, in 
which case odoriferous woods would be preferred 
for things so much handled as musical instru- 
ments are.' — J. F. R. 

ALISGEMA {'A\(ffyrifj.a), a Hellenistic word, 
which occurs in Acts xv. 20 (comp. ver. 29 and 
1 Cor. viii.), with reference to meat sacrificed to 
idols, and there means defilement, pollution. The 
Apostle in these passages alludes to the customs of 
the Gentiles, among whom — after a sacrifice had 
been concluded and a portion of the victim had 
been assigned to the priests — it was usual to hold 
a sacrificial feast in honour of the god, on which 
occasion they ate the residue of the flesh. This feast 
might take place either in the temple or in a pri- 
vate house. But there were many who, from need or 
avarice, salted and laid up the remnants for future 
use (Theoph. Char. c. x.), or even gave them to 
the butchers to sell in the shambles (Shoettg. Hor. 
Heh. ad Act. xv. 20 ; 1 Cor. viii.). This flesh, 
having been offered to idols, was held in abo- 
mination by the Jews; and they considered not 
only those who had been present at these feasts, 
but also those who ate the flesh which had been 
offered up, when afterwards exposed for sale in the 
shambles, as infected by the contagion of idolatry. 
The council at Jerusalem, therefore, at the sug- 
gestion of St. James, directed that converts should 
refuse all invitations to such feasts, and abstain 
from the use of all such meat, that no offence 
might be given to those Christians who had 
been Jews. See more largely Kuinoel, ad Act. 
xv. 20. 

ALLEGORY Q XXKyyopia). This word is 
found in the Authorized Version of Gal. iv. 24, 
but it does not actually exist as a noun in the 
Greek Testament, nor even in the Septuagint. 
In the passage in question Saint Paul cites the 
history o£ the free-born Isaac and the slave-born 
Ishmael, and in proceeding to apply it spiritually 
says, ariva. icrriv aWriyopov/xeya, which does 
not mean, as in the A.V., ' which things are an 
allegory,'' but ' which things are allegorized.'' 
This is of some importance; for in the one case the 
Apostle is made to declare a portion of Old Testa- 
ment history an allegory, whereas in truth he only 
speaks of it as allegorically applied. Allegories 
themselves are, however, of frequent occurrence 
in Scripture, although that name is not there ap- 
plied to them. 

An Allegory has been sometimes considered 
as only a lengthened metaphor ; at other times, as 
a continuation of metaphors. But the nature of 
allegory itself, and the character of allegorical 
interpretation, will be best understood by attend- 
ing to the origin of the term which denotes it. 
Now the term 'Allegory,' according to its ori- 
ginal and proper meaning, denotes a representa- 
tion of one thing which is intended to excite the 
representation of another thing. Every allegory 
must therefore be subjected to a Mofuld exami- 
nation : we must first examine the immediate re- 
presentation, and then consider what other repre- 
sentation it is intended to excite. In most alle- 
gories the immediate representation is made in 
the form of a narrative; and, since it is the object 
of the allegory itself to convey a moral, not an 
historic truth, the narrative itself is commonly 
fictitious. The immediate representation is of no 
further value than as it leads to the ultimate 



representation. It is the application or the moral 
of the allegory which constitutes its worth. 

Since, then, an allegory comprehends two dis- 
tinct representations, the interpretation of an al- 
legory must comprehend two distinct operations. 
The first of them relates to the immediate repre- 
sentation, and the second to the ultimate repre- 
sentation. The immediate representation is un- 
derstood from the words of the allegory ; the 
ultimate representation depends upon the imme- 
diate representation applied to the proper end. 
In the interpretation, therefore, of the former, we 
are concerned with the interpretation of words ; 
in the interpretation of the latter, we are con- 
cerned with the things signified, by the words. 
Now, whenever we speak of allegorical inter- 
pretation, we have always in view the ultimate 
representation, and, consequently, are then con- 
cerned with the interpretation of things. The 
interpretation of the words, which attaches only 
to the immediate representation, or the plain nar- 
rative itself, is commonly called the grammatical 
or the literal interpretation ; although we should 
speak more correctly in calling it the verbal in- 
terpretation, since even in the plainest narratives, 
even in narratives not designed for moral applica- 
tion, the use of words is never restricted to their 
mere literal senses. Custom, however, having 
sanctioned the use of the term ' literal,' instead of 
the term ' verbal ' interpretation, to mark the oppo- 
sition to allegorical interpretation, we must 'un- 
derstand it accordingly. But whatever be the 
term, whether verbal or literal, which we employ 
to express the interpretation of (he words, it must 
always be borne in mind that the allegorical in- 
terpretation is the interpretation of things — of the 
things signified by the words, not of the words 

Bishop Marsh, from the fifth of whose Lectures 
on the Criticism and Interpretation of the Bible, 
these principles are derived, proceeds, in that Lec- 
ture, to apply them to a few of the Scriptural exam- 
ples. Every parable is a kind of allegory ; and there- 
fore the parable of the sower (Luke viii. 5-15), 
being especially clear and correct, is taken as the 
first example. In this we have a plain narrative, 
a statement of a few simple and intelligible facts, 
such, probably, as had fallen within the observa- 
tion of the persons to whom our Saviour addressed 
himself. When he had finished the narrative, or 
the immediate representation of the allegory, he 
then gave the explanation or ultimate representa- 
tion of it; that is, he gave the allegorical inter- 
pretation of it. And that the interpretation Trias 
an interpretation, not of the words, but of the 
things signified Ivy the words, is evident from the 
explanation itself : 'The seed is the word of God; 
those by the wayside are they that hear,' \c. 
(v. 11, &c.) The impressive and pathetic alle- 
gory addressed by Nathan to David affords a 
similar instance of an allegorical narrative ac- 
companied with its explanation (2 Sam. xii. 1-14). 
Allegories thus accompanied, constitute a kind of 
simile, in both parts of which the words them- 
selves are construed either literally or figuratively, 
according to the respective use of them ; and then 
we institute the comparison between the things 
signified in the former part, and the tilings sig- 
nified in the Litter part. 

But. allegorical narratives are frequently left to 
explain themselves, especially when the resern- 

i 2 



blance between the immediate and ultimate re- 
presentation is sufficiently apparent to make an 
explanation unnecessary. Of this kind we cannot 
have a more striking example than that, beautiful 
one contained in the 80th Psalm : ' Thou 
broughtest a vine out of Egypt,' &c. 

The use of allegorical interpretation is not, 
however, confined to mere allegory, or fictitious 
narratives, but is extended also to history, or real 
narratives. And in this case the grammatical 
meaning of a passage is called its historical mean- 
ing, in contradistinction to its allegorical meaning. 
There are two different modes in which Scripture 
history has been thus allegorized. According to 
one mode, facts and circumstances, especially 
those recorded in the Old Testament, have been 
applied to other facts and circumstances, of which 
they have been described as representative. Ac- 
cording to the other mode, these facts and circum- 
stances have been described as mere emblems. 
The former mode is warranted by the practice of 
the sacred writers themselves ; for when facts and 
circumstances are so applied, they are applied as 
types of those things to which the application is 
made. But the latter mode of allegorical inter- 
pretation has no such authority in its favour, 
though attempts have been made to procure such 
authority. For the same things are there de- 
scribed not as types or as real facts, but as mere 
ideal representations, like the immediate repre- 
sentations in allegory. By this mode, therefore, 
history is not treated as allegory, but converted 
into allegory. That this mode of inteipretation 
cannot claim the sanction of St. Paul, from his 
treatment of the history of Isaac and Ishmael, has 
already been shown : the consideration, however, 
of the allegorical modes of dealing with the real 
histories of Scripture is a different subject from 
that of allegories and their interpretation, and be- 
longs to another place [Interpretation, Bi 

ALLELUIA. [Hallelujah.] 
ALLIANCES. From a dread lest the example 
of foreign nations should draw the Israelites into 
the worship of idols, they were made a peculiar 
and separate people, and intercourse and alliance 
with such nations were strongly interdicted (Lev. 
xviii. 3, 4 ; xx. 22, 23). The tendency to idolatry 
was in those times so strong, that the safety of the 
Israelites lay in the most complete isolation that 
could be realized ; and it was to assist this object 
that a country more than usually separated from 
others by its natural boundaries was assigned to 
them. It was shut in by the sea on the west, by 
deserts on the south and east, and by mountains 
and forests on the north. Among a people so 
situated we should not expect to hear much of 
alliances with other nations. 

By far the most remarkable alliance in the po- 
litical history of the Hebrews is that between 
Solomon and Hiram king of Tyre. It is in a 
great degree connected with considerations which 
belong to another head [Commerce]. But it 
may primarily be referred to a partial change of 
feeling which originated in the time of David, and 
which continued to operate among his descendants. 
During his wanderings he was brought into con- 
tact with several of the neighbouring princes, from 
some of whom he received sympathy and support, 
which, after he ascended the throne, he gratefully 
remembered (2 Sam. x. 2). There was probably 


more of this friendly intercourse than the Scripture 
has had occasion to record. Such timely aid, com- 
bined with the respect which his subsequently vic- 
torious career drew from foreign nations, must have 
gone far to modify in him and those about him that 
aversion to strangers which the Hebrews generally 
had been led to entertain. He married the 
daughter of a heathen king, and had by her his 
favourite son (2 Sam. iii. 3) ; the king of Moab 
protected his family (1 Sam. xxii. 3, 4) ; the king 
of Amnion showed kindness to him (2 Sam. x. 2) ; 
the king of Gath showered favours upon him 
(1 Sam. xxvii. ; xxviii. 1, 2) ; the king of Hamath 
sent his own son' to congratulate him on his vic- 
tories (2 Sam. viii. 15) : in short, the rare power 
which David possessed of attaching to himself the 
good opinion and favour of other men, extended 
even to the neighbouring nations, and it would have 
been difficult for a person of his disposition to repel 
the advances of kindness and consideration which 
they made. Among those who made such ad- 
vances was Hiram, king of Tyre ; for it eventually 
transpires that ' Hiram was ever a lover of David ' 
(1 Kings v. 2) ; and it is probable that other in- 
tercourse had preceded that relating to the palace 
which Hiram"s artificers built for David (2 Sam. 
v. 11). The king of Tyre was not disposed to 
neglect the cultivation of the friendly intercourse 
with the Hebrew nation which had thus been 
opened. He sent an embassy to condole with 
Solomon on the death of his father, and to con- 
gratulate him on his accession (1 Kings v. 1). 
The plans of the young king rendered the friend- 
ship of Hiram a matter of importance, and ac- 
cordingly ' a league 1 was formed (1 Kings v. 12) 
between them : and that this league had a re- 
ference not merely to the special matter then in 
view, but was a general league of amity, is evinced 
by the fact that more than 250 years after, a pro- 
phet denounces the Lord's vengeance upon Tyre, 
because she ' remembered not the brotherly cove- 
nant' (Amos i. 9). Under this league large 
bodies of Jews and Phoenicians were associated, 
first in preparing the materials for the Temple 
(1 Kings v. 6-18), and afterwards in navigating 
the Red Sea and the Indian Ocean (1 Kings 
ix. 26-28) : and this increasing intercourse with 
the heathen appears to have considerably weak- 
ened the sentiment of separation, which, in the 
case of the Hebrews, it was of the utmost im- 
portance to maintain. The disastrous consequences 
of even the seemingly least objectionable alliances 
may be seen in the long train of evils, both 
to the kingdom of Israel and of Judah, which 
ensued from the marriage of Ahab with Jezebel, 
the king of Tyre's daughter [Ahab; Jezebel]. 
These consequences had been manifested even in 
the time of Solomon ; for he formed matrimonial 
alliances with most, of the neighbouring kingdoms, 
and to the influence of his idolatrous wives are 
ascribed the abominations which darkened the 
latter days of the wise king (1 Kings xi. 1-8). 

The prophets, who were alive to these conse- 
quences, often raised their voices against such 
dangerous connections (1 Kings xx. 38 ; 2 Chron. 
xvi. 7; xix. 2; xxv. 7, &c. ; Isa. vii. 17); but it 
was found a difficult matter to induce even the 
best kings to place such absolute faith in Jehovah, 
the Head of their state, as to neglect altogether 
those human resources and alliances by which 
other nations strengthened themselves against their 


enemies. The Jewish history, after Solomon, 
affords examples of several treaties with different 
kings of Syria, and with the kings of Assyria and 
Babylon. Asa, one of the most pious monarchs 
that ever sat on the throne of Judah, finding his 
kingdom menaced and his frontier invaded, sent 
to Benhadad, who reigned in Damascus, the most 
costly presents, reminding him of the league which 
had long subsisted between them and their fathers, 
and conjuring him not to succour the enemies of 
Judah, nor renounce the obligations of their old 
alliance (1 Kings xv. 16-20). Attacked by an- 
other king of Israel, whom another king of Da- 
mascus protected, Ahaz implored the king of 
Assyria for aid, and with the treasures of the tem- 
ple and the palace purchased a defensive alliance 
(2 Kings xvi. 5, &c. ; 2 Chron. xviii. 16, &c). 
In later times, the Maccabees appear to have con- 
sidered themselves unrestrained by any but the 
ordinary prudential considerations in contracting 
alliances ; but they confined their alliances to dis- 
tant states, which were by no means likely ever to 
exercise that influence upon the religion of the 
people which was the chief object of dread. The 
most remarkable alliances of this kind in the 
whole Hebrew history are those which were con- 
tracted with the Romans, v/ho were then begin- 
ning to take a part in the affairs of Western Asia. 
Judas claimed their friendly intervention in a 
negotiation then pending between the Jews and 
Antiochus Eupator (2 Mace. xi. 34, sq.) ; and two 
years after he sent ambassadors to the banks of 
the Tiber to propose a treaty of alliance and amity. 
By the terms of this treaty the Romans ostensibly 
threw over the Jews the broad shield of their 
dangerous protection, promising to assist them 
in their wars, and forbidding any who were at 
peace with themselves to be at war with the 
Jews, or to assist directly or indirectly those who 
were so. The Jews, on their part, engaged to 
assist the Romans to the utmost of their power in 
any wars they might wage in those parts. The 
obligations of this treaty might be enlarged or 
diminished by the mutual consent of the contract- 
ing parties. This memorable treaty, having been 
concluded at Rome, was graven upon brass and 
deposited in the Capitol ( 1 Mace. viii. 22-28 ; 
Josephus, Antiq. xii. 10 : other treaties with the 
Romans are given in lib. xiii.). 

Anterior to the Mosaical institutions, such al- 
liances with foreigners were permitted, or at least 
tolerated. Abraham was in alliance with some 
of the Canaanitish princes (Gen. xiv. 13); he also 
entered into a regular treaty of alliance, being 
the first on record, with the Philistine king Abi- 
melech (ch. xxi. 22, sq.), which was renewed by 
their sons (ch. xxvi. 26-30). This primitive treaty 
is a model of its kind : instead of minute stipu- 
lations, it leaves all details to the honest inter- 
pretation of the contracting parties. Abimelech 
says : ' Swear unto me here by God that thou wilt 
not deal falsely with me, nor with my son, nor 
with my son's son ; but according to the kindness 
that I have done unto thee, thou shalt do unto me, 
and unto the land wherein thou hast sojourned.' 
Even after the law, it appears, from some of the 
instances already adduced, that such alliances 
with distant nations as could not be supposed to 
have any dangerous effect upon the religion or 
morals of the people, were not deemed to be inter- 
dicted. The treaty with the Gibeonites is a re- 



markable proof of this. Believing that the am- 
bassadors came from a great distance, Joshua and 
the elders readily entered into an alliance with 
them; and are condemned for it only on the 
ground that the Gibeonites were in fact their near 
neighbours (Josh. ix. 3-27). 

From the time of the patriarchs, a covenant of 
alliance was sealed by the blood of some victim. 
A heifer, a goat, a ram, a turtle dove, and a young 
pigeon, were immolated in confirmation of the co- 
venant between the Lord and Abraham (Gen. 
xv. 9). The animal or animals sacrificed were 
cut in two (except birds, ver. 10), to typify the 
doom of perjurers. This usage often recurs in the 
prophets, and there are allusions to it in the New 
Testament (Jer. xxxiv. 18; Dan. xiii. 55; Matt, 
xxiv. 51; Luke xii. 46). The perpetuity of co- 
venants of alliance thus contracted is expressed 
by calling them ' covenants of salt ' (Num. xviii. 
19 ; 2 Chron. xiii. 5), salt being the symbol of in- 
corruption. The case of the Gibeonites affords an 
exemplary instance, scarcely equalled in the an- 
nals of any nation, of scrupulous adherence to 
such engagements. The Israelites had been abso- 
lutely cheated into the alliance ; but, having been 
confirmed by oaths, it was deemed to be invio- 
lable (Josh. ix. 19). Long afterwards, the treaty 
having been violated by Saul, the whole nation 
was punished for the crime by a horrible famine 
in the time of David (2 Sam. xxi. 1, sqq.). The 
prophet Ezekiel (xvii. 13-16) pours terrible 
denunciations upon king Zedekiah, for acting 
contrary to his sworn covenant with the king of 
Babylon. In this respect the Jews were certainly 
most favourably distinguished among the ancient 
nations ; and, from numerous intimations in Jose- 
phus, it appears that their character foi fidelity to 
their engagements was so generally recognised 
after the Captivity, as often to procure for them 
highly favourable consideration from the rulers of 
Western Asia and of Egypt. 

ALLON (fl?N ; Sept. BaAavos; Vulg. Qiter- 
cus ; Auth. Vers. Oak). The Hebrew word, thus 
pointed, as it occurs in Gen. xxxv. 8 ; Josh. xix. 32 ; 
Isa. ii. 13; vi. 13; xliv. 14; Hos. iv. 13; Amos 
ii. 9 ; Zech. xi. 2, was understood by the ancient 
translators, and has been supposed by most inter- 
preters, to denote the oak, and there is no reason 
to disturb this conclusion. In our version other 
words are also rendered by ' oak,' particularly 
Alah (!"vX), which more probably denotes the 
terebinth-tree [Ai.ah]. The oak is, in fact, less 
frequently mentioned in the original than in the 
A. V., where it occurs so often as to suggest that 
the oak is as conspicuous and as common in Pales- 
tine as in this country. But in Syria oaks are by 
no means common, except, in hilly regions, where 
the elevation gives the effect, of a more northern 
climate; and even in such circumstances it does 
not attain the grandeur in which it often appears in 
our latitudes. Indeed, Syria has not the species 
(Quercus robur) which forms the glory of our own 
forests. The 'oaks of Bashan are in Scripture 
mentioned with peculiar distinction (Isa. ii. 3; 
Ezek. xxvii. 6 ; Zech. xi. 2), as if in the hills be- 
yond the Jordan the oaks had been more abundant 
and of larger growth than elsewhere. This is the 
case even at the present day. In the hilly regions 
of Bashan and Gilead, Burckhardt repeatedly 
mentions forests of thick oaks— thicker than any 




forests he had seen in Syria. He speaks gratefully 
of the shade thus afforded ; and doubtless it was 
the presence of oaks which imparted to the scenery 
that European character which he notices (Syria, 
265, 34S}. On that side of the river a thick oak- 
forest occurs as fa* south as the vicinity of Amman, 
the capital of the Ammonites (p. 356). Oaks of 
low stature are frequent in the hills and plains neai 
the sources of the Jordan (pp. 45, 312, 315) : 
and some of large dimensions are found in differ- 
ent parts of the country, beside the natural re- 
servoirs of water fed by springs (pp. 193, 315). On 

[Branch of Quercus JEgilops.] 

the lower slopes of Lebanon low oak-trees are nu- 
merous, and the inhabitants employ their branches 
in the consfruction of the flat roofs of their dwell- 
ings (pp. 4, 7, 18, 193, 312, &c). Next to 
Burckhardt, Lord Lindsay is the traveller who 
makes the most frequent mention of oaks in Pales- 
tine. He confirms their existing abundance in the 
countries of Bashan and Gilead. He calls them 
'noble prickly oaks,' and 'evergreen oaks,' and 
notices a variety of the latter with a broader leaf 
than usual (Travels, ii. 122, 124, 127). 

But oak-trees are by no means wanting on the 
west of the Jordan, in the proper Land of Ca- 
naan. Lord Lindsay describes the hills of 
southern Judaea about Hebron as covered to the 
top with low shrubs of the prickly oak. Fine 
park scenery, composed chiefly of prickly and 
evergreen oaks, occurs between Samaria and 
Mount Carmel. The same trees abound on the 
southern prolongations of that mountain, and on 
the banks of the Kishon. The thick woods which 
cover Mount Tabor are composed chiefly of oaks 
and pistachio-trees ; and oaks are found in the 
valleys which trend from that mountain (Lind- 
say, ii. 51, 77, 85). Hasselquist found groves of 
the Kermes oak (Q. coccifera) in the valleys 
beyond the plain of Acre, on the road to Naza- 
reth (Travels, p. 153). 

From the above and other notices we collect 
that the species of oak found in Palestine, and 
probably all comprehended under the word Al- 
lon, are — 1. The Evergreen Oak (Quercus ilex), 
which is met with not only in Western Asia, but in 
Northern Africa and Southern Europe. This is a 
tall but not wide-spreading tee ; and the timber, 

being very hard, is much used for purposes in 
which compactness and durability are required. 
2. The Holly-leaved Montpelier Oak (Q. gra- 
muntia), another evergreen, which may be inserted 
on the authority of Pococke. This tree also, as 
its name imports, is a native of Southern Europe, 
and is markedly distinguished from the former 
by its numerous straggling branches and the 
thick underdown of its leaves. 3. The Hairy- 
cupped Oak (Q. crinata), so called from the 
bristly appearance of the calyx. It grows to a 
considerable size, and furnishes an excellent tim- 
ber, much used by the Turks in the building of 
ships and houses. But although this species 
exists in Syria, it is much more common in Asia 
Minor. 4. The Great Prickly-cupped Oak (Q. 
yEgilops or Valonia'), which takes its from 
its large prickly calyx. This species is common 
in the Levant, where it is a handsome tree, which 
it is wot in our ungenial climate, though it has 
long been cultivated. The wood of this spe- 
cies is of little worth ; but its acorns form the 
valonia of commerce, of which 150,000 cwt. are 
yearly imported into this country for the use of 
tanners. 5. The Kermes Oak (Q. cocciferd) 
takes its name from an insect (kermes,' of the 
genus coccus) which adheres to the branches of 
this bushy evergreen shrub, in the form of small 
reddish balls about the size of a pea. This affords 
a crimson dye, formerly celebrated, but now supei 
seded by cochineal. This dye was used by the 
ancient Hebrews; for the word n?in, which 
denotes a worm, and particularly the kermes worm, 
denotes also the dye prepared from it (Isa. i. 18; 
Lam. iv. 5), and is accordingly rendered k6kkivov 
in those passages where it occurs. 

[Quercus iEgilops or Valonia.] 

From the hints of travellers there appear to be 
some other species of oaks in Palestine, but their 
information is not sufficiently distinct to enable 
us to identify them. 

ALLON-BACHUTH (the oak of weeping), a 


place in Bethel, where Rebekah's nurse was buried 
(Gen. xxxv. 8). 

ALMON (flOpy ; Sept. 'AXfxc&v, v. r. TdpaXa), 
one of the three cities which belonged to the priests 
in the tribe of Benjamin (Josh. xxi. 18). It is sup- 
posed to be the same as the Alemeth of 1 Chron. 
vi. 60. Jarchi and Kimchi identify it with Ba- 
harim, which name the Targum (2 Sam. iii. 16) 
renders byAlmeth — both words signifying 'youth.' 
The site is unknown. 

ALMON-DIBLATHAIM, one of the sta- 
tions of the Israelites on their way from Mount 
Hor to the plains of Moab, round by Mount 
Seir (Num. xxxiii. 46). 


ALMS (i\€T)iJ.o<rvi'r)). The English word is an 
abridged form of the Greek, brought down in se- 
veral successive corruptions, still to be found in 
the Anglo-Saxon and early English dialects : 
thus the Saxon translation of the original term is 
(Matt. vi. 4) aelmessan ; Luther's, almosen ; 
Wiclif 's, almesse ; Cranmer's, almose ; Tyndale's, 
almes. The Greek word is derived from eAeos, 
pity or mercy ; and hence comes to denote our 
manifestation of pity, namely, benefactions to the 
needy — ' an almes-deede,' as it is translated in 
the Rheims version of the New Testament. The 
primary meaning of ' alms ' does not, as is the 
case in its Greek original, appear on the face of 
the word, and the derivative signification only 
remains in the English term ; so that a word 
which properly signified merciful feelings and 
merciful actions towards the indigent has, in pro- 
cess of time, been restricted to one particular kind 
of charitable deeds, denoting now scarcely any- 
thing more than giving money to beggars. This 
departure from the etymological meaning of the 
original word should be carefully borne in mind 
by those who undertake to expound such passages 
of Scripture as bear on the subject. 

The regulations of the Mosaic law respecting 
property, and its benign spirit towards the poor, 
went far to prevent the existence of penury as a 
permanent condition in society, and, consequently, 
by precluding beggary, to render the need of 
almsgiving unnecessary. Poverty, however, con- 
sidered as a state of comparative want, Moses 
seems to have contemplated as a probable event 
in the social frame which he had established ; and 
accordingly, by the appointment of specific regu- 
lations, and the enjoining of a general spirit of 
tender-heartedness, he sought to prevent destitu- 
tion and its evil consequences. The law which 
he promulgated in this matter is found in Lev. 
xxv. 35 : ' And if thy brother be waxen poor, 
and fallen into decay with thee, then shalt 
thou relieve him.' The benignity and large- 
ness' of spirit of the legislator appear in the con- 
cluding words — ' Yea, though he be a stranger 
or a sojourner, that he may live with thee.' The 
whole of the chapter may be advantageously con- 
sulted. The consideration by which this merci- 
ful enactment is recommended has peculiar force, 
.' I am the Lord your God, which brought you 
forth out of the land of Egypt to give you the 
land of Canaan, and to be your God.' The spi- 
rit of the Hebrew legislator on this point is forci- 
bly exhibited in Deut. xv. 7 et seq. : ' If there be 
among you a poor man .... thou shalt o]ien thine 
hand wide unto him Beware that thine eye 



be not evil against thy poor brother, and thou 
givest him nought ; and he cry unto the Lord 
against thee, and it be sin unto thee. Thou shalt 
surely give him, and thine heart shall not be 
grieved when thou givest unto him : because that 
for this the Lord thy God shall bless thee in all 
thy works.' The great antiquity of the practice 
of benevolence towards the poor is shown in the 
very beautiful passage which is found in Job 
xxix. 1 3 et seq. The phrase, ' father to the poor,' 
there given to the venerable patriarch, involves 
higher praise even than Cicero's ' pater patriee.' 
How high the esteem was in which this virtue con- 
tinued to be held in the time of the Hebrew 
monarchy may be learnt from Psalm xli. 1 — 
' Blessed is he that considereth the poor ; the 
Lord will remember him in time of trouble.' 
See also Psalm cxii. 9; Prov. xiv. 31. The pro- 
gress of social corruption, however, led to the 
oppression of the poor, which the prophets, after 
their manner, faithfully reprobated (Isaiah lviii. 3) : 
where, among other neglected duties, the Israel- 
ites are required to deal their bread to the hungry, 
and to bring the outcast poor to their house. See 
also Isaiah x. 2 ; Amos ii. 7 ; Jer. v. 28 ; Ezek. 
xxii. 29. 

However favourable to the poor the Mosaic in- 
stitutions were, they do not appear to have wholly 
prevented beggary ; for the imprecation found in 
Psalm cix. 10, ' Let his children be vagabonds 
and beg,' implies the existence of beggary as a 
known social condition. Begging naturally led 
to almsgiving, though the language of the Bible 
does not present us with a term for ' alms ' till the 
period of the Babylonish captivity, during the ca- 
lamities attendant on which the need probably 
introduced the practice. HpTV corresponds with 
the Greek i\er\(jLoavvr], signifying originally that 
which is right, just, — and thence, derivatively, 
mercy and merciful deeds ; and affords an inter- 
esting illustration of the gentle spirit of the Mo- 
saic religion, since the ideas of justice and mercy 
are represented as springing from the same radical 
conception. In Psalm cxlv. 7, occurs, perhaps, 
the earliest passage in which the word clearly sig- 
nifies love or mercy. ' They shall abundantly 
utter the memory of thy great goodness, and shall 
sing of thy righteousness; where the parallelism 
shows that by np*7V 'mercy' is intended. In 
Daniel, however, iv. 27, we find the word actu- 
ally rendered iAerifj-oavvri in the Septuagint — 
though 'righteousness' is retained in our version. 
The ensuing member of the sentence puts the 
meaning beyond a question — ' king, break off 
thy sins by righteousness and thine iniquities by 
showing mercy to the poor, if it may be a length- 
ening of thy tranquillity.' Anew idea is here pre- 
sented, namely, that, of merit and purchase, which 
is found more forcibly expressed in the Greek ver- 
sion afiaprias aov iv iAtrifioavvais Avrpaxrcu. 
Almsgiving had come to be regarded as a means of 
conciliating God's favour and of warding off 
evil. At a still later period this idea took a firm 
seat in the national mind, and alms-deeds were 
regarded as a mark of distinguished virtue (Tobit 
ii. 15 ; iv. 11). That begging was customary in 
the time of the Saviour is clear from Mark x. 46, 
' Blind Bartimeus sat by the wayside be_ 
and Acts iii. 2, ' A lame man was laid daily at 
the gate of the temple, called B.uutilul, to ask 
alms.' Comp. verse 10. And diat it iva- usual for 



the worshippers, as they entered the temple, to give 
relief, appears from the context, and particularly 
from the tine answer to the lame man's entreaty, 
made by the apostle Peter. The general spirit of 
Christianity, in regard to succouring the needy, is 
nowhere better seen than in 1 John iii. 17 : — 
' Whoso hath this world's good, and seeth his 
brother have need, and shutteth up his bowels 
frbm him, how dwelleth the love of God hi him V 
With the faithful and conscientious observance of 
the ' royal law ' of love, particular manifestations 
of mercy to the poor seem to be left by Christi- 
anity to be determined by time, place, and cir- 
cumstances ; and it cannot be supposed that a 
religion, one of whose principles is ' that, if any 
would not work, neither should he eat ' (2 Thess. 
iii. 10), can give any sanction to indiscriminate 
almsgiving, or intend to encourage the crowd of 
wandering, idle beggars with which some parts of 
the world are still infested. The emphatic lan- 
guage employed by the Lord Jesus Christ and 
others (Luke iii. 11 ; vi. 30 ; xi. 41 ; xii. 33 ; 
Matt. vi. 1 ; Acts ix. 37 ; x. 2, 4 i is designed to 
enforce the general duty of a merciful and prac- 
tical regard to the distresses of the indigent — a 
duty which all history shows men have been la- 
mentably prone to neglect : while the absence of 
ostentation and even secrecy, which the Saviour 
enjoined in connection xvifh almsgiving, was in- 
tended to correct actual abuses, and bring the 
practice into harmony with the spirit of the Gos- 
pel. In the inimitable reflections of Jesus on the 
widow's mite (Mark xii. 42) is found a principle 
of great value, to the effect that the magnitude of 
men's offerings to God is to be measured by the 
disposition of mind whence they proceed ; a prin- 
ciple which cuts up by the very roots the idea 
that merit attaches itself to almsgiving as such, 
and increases in proportion to the number and 
costliness of our alms-deeds. 

One of the earliest effects of the working of 
Christianity in the hearts of its professors was the 
care which it led them to take of the poor and in- 
digent in the ' household of faith.' Neglected 
and despised by the world, cut off from its sympa- 
thies, and denied any succour it might have given, 
the members of the early churches were careful 
not only to make provision in each case for its 
own poor, but to contribute to the necessities of 
other though distant communities (Acts xi. 29 ; 
xxiv. 17; 2 Cor. ix. 12). This commendable 
practice seems to have had its Christian origin in 
the deeply interesting fact (which appeal's from 
John xiii. 29) that the Saviour and his attend- 
ants were wont, notwithstanding their own compa- 
rative poverty, to contribute out of their small 
resources something for the relief of the needy. — 

J. R. B. 

ALOE. [Aualim]. 

ALPHA (A), the first letter of the Greek al- 
phabet, corresponding to the Hebrew &, Aleph. 
Both the Hebrews and the Greeks employed the 
letters of their alphabets as numerals, and A 
(Alpha or Aleph) therefore denoted one or the 
first. Hence our Lord says of himself, that he is 
(rh A) Alpha and (rb XI) Omega, i. e. the first 
and the last, the beginning and the ending, as he 
himself explains it (Rev. i. 8, 11; xxi. 6; xxii. 

ALPHABET. The origin of alphabetical 
writing belongs to a period long antecedent to the 


date of any historical testimonies, or ancient mo- 
numents, which have come down to us. This 
want of documentary evidence, however, has left 
a wider field for conjecture ; and a mistaken and 
sometimes disingenuous zeal for the honour of 
the Scriptures has not only led many learned 
men to ascribe the invention of letters to Adam, 
Seth, Enoch, and Noah, but to produce copies 
of the very alphabets they employed. Several 
such alphabets, derived chiefly from Bonaventura, 
Hepburn, Roccha, and Athanasius Kircher, may 
be seen in Bangii Ccelum Orientis (or, according 
to the new title which was subsequently prefixed 
to it, Exercitationes de Ortu et Progressu Lite- 
raruni), Hafniae, ,1657, p. 99, sqq. Our own 
time also has produced an attempt to prove, from 
the astrological character of the Hebrew alphabet 
— i. e. from its representing the relations of the 
zodiac and seven planets— that it was discovered, 
probably by Noah, on the 7th Sept. b.c. 3446 
(Seyffart's Unser Alphabet ein Abbild des Thier* 
kreises, Leips. 1834). 

The earliest and surest data, however, on which 
any sound speculation on this subject can be 
based, are found in the genuine paleeographical 
monuments of the Phoenicians ; in the manifest 
derivation of all other Syro-Arabian and almost 
all European characters from that type, and in 
the testimony which history bears to the use and 
transmission of alphabetical writing. 

The true principles of comparative Syro-Ara- 
bian palaeography are a discovery of almost mo- 
dern date. Bochart, Bernard, and others, in their 
early attempts, did not even possess the Phoenician 
alphabet at all, but only the Samaritati of printed 
books or of the Hasmonasan coins ; for Rhenferd 
was the first that produced the genuine alphabet, 
in 1705. . Besides, there was a very general pre- 
judice that our present square Hebrew character 
was the primitive type (a list of some of the 
champions of which opinion is given in Carpzov's 
Crit. Sacr. p. 227) ; and the want of documents 
long concurred with that notion in hindering any 
important effort in the right direction. It was 
reserved for Kopp to make (in his Bilder und 
Hchriften der Vorzeit, Mannheim, 1819) the first 
systematic representation of the genealogy of an- 
cient Syro-Arabian alphabets. The latter portion 
of his second volume contains elaborate tabular 
views of the characters of a wide ethnographical 
circle, arranged according to their proximity to 
the parent type ; and, by the breadth of his com- 
parison, as well as by his deductions from the 
laws affecting the art of writing, he first suc- 
ceeded in establishing a number of new and un- 
expected truths, which have had a permanent 
influence on all subsequent inquiries. Lastly, 
Gesenius, who possesses infinite philological ad- 
vantages over Kopp, and who has also long de- 
voted a more exclusive attention to Phoenician 
remains, has recently given accurate copies of the 
completest collection of them ever published, and 
has illustrated the characters and the language of 
the monuments themselves, and the general sub- 
ject of palaeography, with great learning and 
acumen : Scriptures Ling2tceque Phmnicies Monu- 
nienta, P. III., Lips. 1837 — to which this article 
has many obligations. 

Seventy-seven inscriptions and numerous coins 
— found chiefly at Tyre and Sidon, at Malta aud 
Cyprus, hi Sicily, the north of Africa, aud on the 



coast of Spain — have preserved to us the earliest 
form of that alphabet from which all others have 
been derived. These remains themselves belong 
generally to the period between Alexander the 
Great and the reign of Augustus ; yet one is sup- 
posed to belong to the year b.c. 394, and the 
latest to be of the year a.d. 203. They are thus 
much later than the oldest Greek inscriptions ; 
but that, nevertheless, does not affect their claim 
of preserving the most ancient known form of the 
primitive alphabet. 

The characters of this alphabet, as seen on these 
monuments, are remarkable for their very angular 
and comparatively complex shape. This is an 
evidence of their antiquity ; as this is just that 
feature which the tachygraphy and softer writing- 
materials of later times would naturally tend to 
obliterate. They also approach nearer to rude 
resemblances of tbe physical objects after which 
they are named, than those in any other Syro- 
Arabian alphabet, and, as another confirmation, 
resemble most their nearest descendant, the oldest 
Greek letters. This alphabet may be said to con- 
sist solely of consonants ; as in it * ) fc$ do not, 
except under the very narrowest limitations, pos- 
sess the power of denoting the place and quality 
of a vowel, as they do in Hebrew. The mode of 
writing is, to use a technical term, in every re- 
spect much more defective than in Hebrew, espe- 
cially in tbe middle of a word. There are no 
vestiges of vowel-points nor of final letters. Words 
are chiefly written continuously, yet sometimes 
with intervals, and with a rudimental interpunc- 
tion. The use of diacritical marks seems to have 
been known ; and that of abbreviations is very 
. frequent. The course of the writing is from right 
to left, and there are no traces of the alternate or 
f3ov<TTpo(pr)8l>v order. This alphabet was evidently 
invented, or first used, by a people' speaking a 
Syro-Arabian language ; as an alphabet consist- 
ing so exclusively of consonants is possible only 
in that family of language in which the vowels 
express merely the accidental part, the modifi- 
cations and relations of the idea, and not its 
essence. It is, moreover, fully adequate to denote 
all the sounds of their speech ; for it distinguishes 
that remarkable series of gutturals which is pe- 
culiar to the Syro- Arabians ; and is able to ex- 
press every sound without compound letters, to 
which other nations, who adapted Phoenician cha- 
racters to their own native sounds, have been 
obliged to have recourse. The names of the 
twenty-two characters and the order of their ar- 
rangement can only be gathered (but then with 
considerable certainty) from the Hebrew and 
Greek alphabets. The names are evidently Syro- 
Arabian ; and, as they appear in Hebrew, belong, 
as to their form, to a period anterior to the de- 
velopment of that language as we find it in the 
earliest books of the Old Testament: and, as they 
appear in the Greek, they have undergone modi- 
fications which (although some have considered 
them to betray signs of the Aramaic status em- 
phaticus) are explained by Gesenius to be chiefly 
the effect, of an influence, which is seen in other 
words (?33, va&Xa ; u?ft, fj.d\6a) which the 
Greeks derived from the Phoenicians. 

In tracing the derivation of all other alphabets 
from this type, the records of the intercourse of na- 
tions with each other and of their gradual n<-<;ui- 
sition of the arts of civilization furnish indeed an 



important evidence ; but the eye, especially when 
trained in the school of such observation, is alone 
qualified to test the truth of even historical de- 
ductions on such a subject. It is, therefore, or:ly 
the attentive view of accurate plates which will 
enable the reader fully to understand the follow- 
ing genealogical table of alphabets, which is 
taken from Gesenius. To give it entire is, never- 
theless, the shortest way of laying before the stu- 
dent the results of a tedious inquiry ; and will, 
at the same time, secure the opportunity of subse- 
quent reference, by which the treatment of the 
several Syro-Arabian languages, under their re- 
spective heads, may be materially facilitated. 

The lines which run between the different 
names are intended to mark the channel, and 
sometimes the distinct yet convergent channels, 
through which any given character has been de- 
rived. Thus, to give an illustration, the square 
Hebrew of our printed books is shown to descend 
from the old Aramaean of Egypt, but to be mo- 
dified by the influence of the Palmyrene. 

This primitive alphabet underwent various 
changes in its transmission to cognate and alien 
nations. The former class will be incidentally 
noticed when treating of the Syro-Arabian lan- 
guages separately. Among the latter, those mo- 
difications which were necessary to adapt it to 
the Greek language are the most remarkable. 
The ancient Greek alphabet is an immediate de- 
scendant of the Phoenician ; and its letters cor- 
respond, in name, figure, and order, to those of its 
prototype. Even the course of the writing, from 
right to left, was at first observed in short inscrip- 
tions ; and then half retained in the PovarpocpriSov. 
But as the characters were reversed in the alter- 
nate lines of the /3ovarpo<pr]S6i', and the order 
from left to right became at length the standard 
one, the systematic reversal of the characters be- 
came the law. This of itself was a striking de- 
parture from the Phoenician mode of writing. A 
more important change was produced by the na- 
ture of the language. The Greeks found the nume- 
rous gutturals superfluous, and at the same time 
felt the indispensable necessity of characters to 
denote their vowels. Accordingly, they con- 
verted Aleph, He, Joel, and Ain into A, E, I, O. 
This last transmutation (which is the oidy sur- 
prising one) is accounted for by Gesenius, on the 
ground that the Phoenician Ain leaned so much 
to the O sound, that it was written in Phoenician 
inscriptions to express that vowel (in cases when 
it arose from the fusion of the sounds A and L), 
and that the Greeks, when writing a Phoenician 
word in their own way, presented it by O, as 
Ba.\\a07Js = ^HT'yn. Moreover, the LXX. appear 
to have felt the same influence, as M&>x« for 
i"DJ/'D, Gen. xxii. 24 ( Vide Gesenii Momonenta, 
p. 431). Cheth also became the rough breathing, 
and subsequently was appropriated to the long E. 

The two alphabets correspond as follows : 

K A D © V ° 

IB i i an 

i r 3 k ? — 

1 A ^5 A p KrfTnra 


1 F Bctf 3 N W 5 2dV 

T Z D 2fy/*a n T 

n h 




The earliest Phoenician. 

Ancient Greek. Ancient Persian. 




Ancient Hebrew Aramaean, Later Himjarite. 

on Ha>mon. coins. on Egypt, mon, Phoenician, 



K.ufic Peshito. Uigux- 

There is evidence that the Greeks received all 
these letters (except Tsade), because they con- 
tinued to employ them as numerals, after they 
had ceased to use them as letters. The loss of 
Tsade, however, affeeted the numerical value of 
all letters below its place in the series. They 
subsequently rejected three letters in writing : 
/3av, the Roman F ; /coVTra, the Roman Q ; and 
one of the sibilants. Gesenius explains the last 
case thus : The ancient alphabet had adopted 
Zeta for Zain, Sigma properly for Samech, and 
San for Shin. As the sound sh was disagreeable 
to the ear of the Greeks, it was dropped. Having 
thus no need of two characters to express their 
single S, the two letters gradually coalesced, and 
were indiscriminately called Sigma and San. 
But the S retained the position of the Shin, and 
not of the Samech ; and when Xi was introduced, 
it usurped the place of the Samech. He also 
thinks that, in the statement of Pliny (Hist. Nat. 
vii. 56), about sixteen or eighteen Cadmean letters, 
the first number is decidedly too small ; but finds 
some ground for the eighteen of Aristotle, in the 
facts that the Greeks rejected three, and so rarely 
used Z, that the actual number of current letters 
was reduced to that amount. 

The historical testimonies respecting the use 
and transmission of letters disagree much as to the 
nation to which the discovery is to be ascribed. 
There are, however, only three nations which can 
compete for the honour — the Babylonians, the 
Phoenicians, and the Egyptians. Many eminent 
men, among whom are Kopp and Hoffmann, 
support the Babylonian claim to the priority of 
use. The chief arguments, as stated by them 


(Bilder und Schriften, ii. 147; Gram. ISyr. 
p. 61), are based on the very early civilization of 
Babylon ; on numerous passages which attribute 
the discovery to the ~2vpoi, Syri, and XctAScuoi 
(quoted in Hoffmann, I. c.) ; and especially on 
the existence of a Babylonian brick containing 
an inscription in characters resembling the Phoe- 
nician. To these arguments Geseraius has re- 
plied most at length in the article P-a.hseogra.phie, 
in Ersch and Gruber's Allgemeine Encyclopiidie. 
He especially endeavours to invalidate the evi- 
dence drawn from the brick (of which Kopp pos- 
sessed an inaccurate transcript, and was only able 
to give an unsatisfactory interpretation), and 
asserts that the characters are Phoenician, but by 
no means those of the most antique shape. He 
considers the language of the inscription to be 
Aramaic ; and maintains that the only conclu- 
sion which can fairly be drawn from the exist- 
ence of such an inscription there, is, that during 
the time of the Persian kings the Babylonians 
possessed a common alphabet almost entirely 
agreeing with the Phoenician. And, indeed, as 
this inscription only contains seven letters, its 
claim to originality is not a matter of much mo- 
ment ; for, in the only practical question of pa- 
laeography, the Phoenician alphabet still continues 
to be, to us at least, the primitive one. He also 
objects that it is, in itself, improbable that the 
alphabet was invented by the AraniEeans, on the 
ground that, in their dialect, as far as it is known 
to us, * 1 j) X are very weak and indistinct; 
whereas the existence of such letters in the pri- 
mitive alphabet at all, is an evidence that they 
were well marked consonants, at least to the 


people who felt the necessity of denoting them by 
separate signs. 

Nearly an equal number of ancient authorities 
might be cited as testimonies that the discovery of 
letters was ascribed to the Phoenicians and to the 
Egyptians (see Walton's Prolegomena, ii. 2). 
And, indeed, there is a view, suggested by Gese- 
nius (Palceographie, I. c), by which their rival 
claims might, to a certain extent, be reconciled : — 
that is, by the supposition that the hierogly- 
ph! cal was, indeed, the earliest kind of all 
writing ; but that the Phoenicians, whose com- 
merce led them to Egypt, may have borrowed 
the first germ of alphabetical writing from the 
phonetic hieroglyphs. There is at least a re- 
markable coincidence between the Syro-Arabian 
alphabet and the phonetic hieroglyphs, in that in 
both the figure of a material object was made the 
sign of that sound with which the name of the 
object began. To follow this further would lead 
beyond the object of this article. But, if this 



theory were true, it would still leave the Phoeni- 
cians the possibility of having actually developed 
the first alphabetical writing ; and that, together 
with the fact that" the earliest monuments of the 
Syro-Arabians have preserved their characters, 
and the unanimous consent with which ancient 
writers ascribe to them the transmission of the 
alphabet to the Greeks (Herod, v. 58 ; Diod. 
Sic. v. 74), may make the probabilities prepon- 
derate in their favour [Writing ; Whiting- 
materials]. — J. N. 

Alphabetical Sounds. In connection with 
the subject of the Hebrew and Greek alphabets, 
we may be allowed to enter on some consider- 
ations which are seldom duly developed in the 
grammars of either language ; and which will 
besides throw some light on the Greek spelling of 
Hebrew names. 

Let us first request the reader to bestow a little 
study on the following table of consonants : — 









Labial . . 








Dental or 








Guttural or 







ch or g 






n h 

n ? WiA 


French n 


Sibilant or 

t s D 
I sh W 

French J 



The names annexed to the left-hand of the 
rows are not perfectly satisfactory. To ' Labial ' 
no objection can be made. Neither 'Dental' nor 
' Palatal ' fitly describes the second row, in 
which the sounds are produced by contact (more 
or less slight and momentary) of the tongue with 
the teeth, gums, or palate ; while the third row, 
on the contrary, does not need contact. The 
term ' Guttural ' is apt, improperly, to give the 
idea of a roughness which does not exist in k 
and g. The soft palatal sounds of x, y, ch, 
cannot be named absolutely ' Palatals,' without 
confounding them with those of the row above. 
The word ' Aspirate' (or breathing) has in English 
been generally appropriated to a ' rough ' breath- 
ing ; and it is against our usage to conceive of 
the liquid y as a breathing at all. 

Those consonants are called explosive on which 
the voice cannot dwell when they terminate a 
word ; as ap, ah, ad. At their end a rebound of 
the organs takes place, giving the sound of an 

obscure vowel ; as appe for ap : for if this final 
sound be withheld, but half of the consonant is 
enunciated. The Latins, following the Greeks, 
called these ' Mutes.' Or. the contrary, we name 
those continuous the sound of which can be in- 
definitely prolonged, as ajfff. . ., assss. . . 

For the names thin and full, others say sharp 
and fiat ; or hard and soft ; or surd and sonant ; 
or whispering and vocal. It would appear that 
in whispering the two are merged in one; for 
instance, p cannot be distinguished from b, nor 
z from s. Yet the ' Aspirates' (or fourth row) will 
not strictly bear this test. 

By the Greek letters 0, 8, x< 7j we understand 
the sounds given to them by the modern Greeks ; 
in which 6 = English th in thin; S = English 
th in that; x = German or Irish ch ; y = Dutch g. 
To conceive of the last sound, when we know that 
of x, it is only requisite to consider that the fol 
lowing proportion strictly holds : — g (hard) : k : : 
y : x- At the same time, y and x have a double 



pronunciation, rougher and smoother, as ch in 
German has. When their roughness is much 

exaggerated, they give the Arabic sounds «i (kha) 

and G (ghain), which last is the consonant gh 

heard in gargling. As for the softer sounds, when 
their softness is exaggerated, the x passes through 
the softest German ch into a mere y ; while the y 
is gradually merged in the soft imperfect r of 
lispers, and finally in to. 

But the fourth row, or the ' Aspirates,' yet more 
urgently need explanation to an Englishman. 
The explosive aspirates come under the general 
head of what is called the Soft Breathing in Greek 
grammar (although JJ in the Arab mouth is far 
enough from soft), while the continuous aspirates 
are Rough Breathings. Moreover, y is a fuller 
and stronger K, just as H is a fuller and stronger 
n ; and although the relation does not seem to be 
precisely that of b : p, or d : t, it is close enough 
to justify our tabular arrangement. As for J"!, it 
is rather softer than our English h ; and f!, or hh, 
is the Irish h, a wheezing sound. The consonant 
K is the hiatus heard between the vowels in the 
Greek word lr\ie, and J/ is the same sound exag- 
gerated by a compression of the throat. The last 
is, in short, a jerking hiatus, such as a stuttering 
man often prefixes to a vowel-sound, when with 
effort he at length utters it. That H, JJ, are ex- 
plosive, and H, n, continuous, is evident on trial. 
It is also clear that the hiatus X readily softens 
itself into the liquid y. Just so, for the name 

?????n£ (Max'lal'el) the Sept. reads MaXeXe^A, 
where the 6 before tjA. is in fact meant for an 
English y. On this ground we have put y into 
the fourth row. 

It is important to observe how the consonants 
of different nations differ. For instance, the Ger- 
man p and b are intermediate to the English p 
and b, so as to be difficult to our ears to distin- 
guish, and the Armenians have two different p's. 
So the English h is intermediate in strictness to H 
and (I, if at least we assume that these Hebrew 

letters had the sound of the Arabic IS and *., 

Now this is a general phenomenon, in comparing 
the Indo-European with the Syro-Arabian sounds. 
Our k is between the two Hebrew or Arab k's ; 
our t is between their two fs; and so on. To 
explain this, observe that we may execute a t in 
various ways ; first, by slapping the tongue flat 
against the teeth, as an Irishman or man of Cum- 
berland does when he says water ; secondly (what 
is rather less broad), by slightly touching the root of 
the teeth, as a Frenchman or Italian does ; thirdly, 
by touching only the gums, which is the English 
method ; fourthly, by touching the palate, or by 
pressing on the gums with a muscular jerk. One 

or other of the last is the Hebrew 13, the Arab ^ ; 

hence some call it a palatal, others a strong t. 
In touching the palate, the throat is involuntarily 
opened, and a guttural sound is imparted to the 
letter and to the following vowel; for which 
reason it has been also called a guttural t. The 
other method, of pressing the tongue firmly, but 
not on the palate, is an Armenian t, but perhaps 
not the hue Syro-Arabian. * 

What we have here to insist on is, that differ- 
ences which with us are provincialisms, with 


tnem constitute differences of elementary sounds. 
To a Hebrew, T\- differs from 13, or 2 from p, as 
decidedly as with us p from b. On the other 
hand, t and th (thin), as d and th (full), which 
with us have an elementary distinction, are but 
euphonic variations in Hebrew. 

After this, we have to explain that 3 was ori- 
ginally sounded forwarder on the palate than 
English k, as p was far backwarder, at the root 
of the tongue. So D was probably forwarder, 
and ¥ certainly backwarder than our s, each of 
them being nevertheless a kind of s. That ¥ 
was not ts is seen by n?¥, \Y)t, ■t^lVB, &c. &c, 
which are written SeAAa, ~2,id>u, Metrpa'iV, &c. &c. 
in the Sept., as we'll as from the analogy of the 

Arabic , -o . The ts pronunciation is a late in- 
vention, as is the ng sound, which has been arbi- 
trarily assigned to ]). Nevertheless, out of ~)1¥ the 
Greeks made Tvpos, which is contrary to the ana- 
logy of 2i5<av for fTPX : yet the adjective Sarra- 
nus, instead of Tyrius, used by Virgil, may prove 
that Sarr or Sour was in ancient, as in modern 
days, the right pronunciation of Tyre. In English 
we have the double sound s and sh, which is illus- 
trative of D and £3, 3 and p, &c, to which modifi- 
cation it is closely analogous. For sh is only a 
modified s, being formed with the broad or central 
part of the tongue, instead of the tip. In this action 
the forepart of the tongue forms itself into a sort of 
cup, the whole rim of which comes near to the 
palate while the breath rushes between. On the 
contrary, in sounding ^', only a single transverse 
section of the tongue approaches the palate ; but 
this section is far back, and the lips are protruded 
and smacked, so as to constitute a mouthing s. 
Farther, the alliance of r to s, so strongly marked 
in the Greek and Latin languages, justifies our 
arranging them in one row. The r is formed by 
a vibration along the tongue, which bears some 
analogy to the rush of the breath along its surface, 
on which the s and sh depend. The Armenians 
have a twofold r, of which one, if we mistake not, 
is related to the other, as our sh to s. 

The Hebrews were commonly stated to have 
given two sounds to each of the letters S 2 H 
T 3 3 so as to produce the twelve sounds, pf, 
b v, t 0, d 5, h %, g y ; but it is now generally ad- 
mitted that it was not so originally. The Greeks 
(at least provincially), even in early days, pro- 
nounced Brjra, Veta, as they now also say 
Ghamma, Dhelta ; and the Italians for Latin b 
sometimes have v, sometimes b. The Hebrew 
corruption was however so early as constantly to 
show itself in the Sept. ; indeed, as a general 
rule, we must regard the thin consonants 3J13 
as having assumed the continuous, instead of the 
explosive, pronunciation ; i. e. they were become 
/, 6, x- Thus }1£>B, 73,-in, JJ7J3 are written 
<bi<rwv, 0oj3eA, Xavadv, in spite of the dagesh lene 
by which the later Masorites directed the initial 
letters to be sounded P, T, K. Yet there is no 
immovable rule. Thus the D'flS is in the same 
book variously rendered XeTreie'i/j. and Kirteuv 
(1 Mace. i. 1, and viii. 5). It will be observed 
that a decidedly dental t is very near to th, and 
a k, very mincing and forward in the mouth, 
easily melts into ky, as in the Turkish language, 
and thence into soft %• Jn tnis wa y» e and X 
having been adopted for fl and 3, r and k. were 
left as the general representatives of J3 and p. It 


is well known that the Ephraimites at an early- 
period said s, at least in some words, for sh, as in 
the celebrated tale of Shibboleth ; but this cor 
ruption went on increasing after the orthography 
had been fixed, so that it became requisite to 
denote by a dot many a W sh, the sound of 
which had degenerated into D s. It is rather 
perplexing to find D occupy the same place in tht 
Hebrew alphabet as H in the Greek, a fact which 
perhaps still needs elucidation. 

But we must turn to an important subject — 
the tendency of aspirates to degenerate into 
vowels. The muscular language of barbarians 
seems to love aspirates ; in fact, a vowel ener- 
getically sounded is itself an aspirate, as an 
aspirate softened is a vowel. Let it be noticed in 
passing that an over-vocalised language is by no 
means soft. Such a word as Ivie has of necessity 
strong hiatuses between the vowels, which hiatuses, 
although not loritten in Western languages, are 
virtually consonantal aspirates; in which respect 
an English representation of some barbarous lan- 
guages is very misleading. The Hebrew spelling 
of Greek names often illustrates this ; for ex- 
ample, Antiochits is D-')D1K''D3N, where the central 
N indicates the hiatus between i and o. That the 
letters fi (final), *, 1, from the earliest times were 
used for the long vowels A, I, U, seems to be 
beyond doubt. At a later period perhaps, fc? was 
used for another A : the Greeks adopted )} for O, 
and finally n for a long E. It is probable that a 
corruption in the Hebrew pronunciation of H 
and n had already come in when the Sept. 
adopted the spelling of proper names which we 
find. As for H, it is the more remarkable that the 
Greek aspirate should not have been used for it ; 
for both in Greece and in Italy the h sound must 
have been very soft, and ultimately has been lost. 
So we find in the Sept. 'Af3e\ for ^2n Hebel, 
'.Qtrrje for J?L^in Itnshea ; and even the rougher 
and stronger aspirate n often vanishes. Thus 
'Ej>o>x for "pjn Ilhenok ; 'PowPdO for ]"lh'm Reh- 
hobot, &c. Sometimes however the n becomes %, 

as in for DPI, XaXax for n?3 ; which may 
possibly indicate that n, at least in proper names, 
occasionally retained the two sounds of Arabic 



~ ' hh and «'• kh. 

The V was of necessity 

omitted in Greek, since, at least when it. was be- 
tween two vowels, no nearer representation could 
be made than by leaving a hiatus. Where it has 
been denoted by Greek y, as in VSfxoppa, FatSaS, 
Srjy&Jp, there is no doubt that it had the force of 

the Arabic C. (ghain), whether or not this sound 

ever occurred in Hebrew except in proper names. 
Respecting the vowels, we may add that it is 
now historically established, alike in the Syro- 
Arabian and in the Indo-European languages, 
that the sounds e and 5 (pronounced as in maid 
and boat) are later in time than those of a, 7, a, 
and are in fact corruptions of the diphthongs ai, 
au. Hence, originally, three long vowels, a, i, u, 
with three vowel-points for the same when short, 
appeared to suffice. On the four very short 
vowels of Hebrew a needless obscurity is left in 
our grammars by its not being observed that we 
have the same number in the English language, 
really distinct ; as in sudden (or castle), con- 
trary, nobody, beneath; although it is probable 

that with H the vowel was clearer and sharper 
than in any short English a. We have even the 
furtive vowel of which the Hebrew grammars 
speak ; namely, when a word ends in r, preceded 
by a long accented vowel or diphthong. In this 
case, a very short a is heard in true English 
speech, but not in Irish, before the r, as in beer, 
shore, flour (whence the orthography floicer, 
bower, &c), which corresponds to the Hebrew 
n-1"l, jn. The Arabs have it also when the final 
letter is p.—F. W. N. 

1. ALPHjEUS CAXcpalos), father of James the 
Less (Matt. x. 3; Luke vi. 15), and husband of 
Mary, the sister of our Lord's mother (John xix. 
25); for which reason James is called 'the Lord's 
brother 1 [Brother]. By comparing John xix. 
25, with Luke xxiv. 10, and Matt. x. 3, it ap- 
pears that Alphseus is the same person as Cleo- 
phas; Alphseus being his Greek, and Cleophas 
his Hebrew or Syriac name, according to the 
custom of the provinces or of the time, when men 
had often two names, by one of which they were 
known to their friends and countrymen, and bv 
the other to the Romans or strangers. Possibly, 
however, the double name in Greek arises, in this 
instance, from a diversity, in pronouncing the |"l 
in his Aramaean name, '"S?!"!, a diversity which 
is common also in the Septuagint (see Kuinoel 
in Joan. xix. 25) [Names]. 

2. ALPHJ5US, the father of the evangelist 
Levi or Matthew (Mark ii. 14). 

ALTAR (0279 from rQT, to slay (a victim), 
but used also for the altar of incense ; Sept. ge- 
nerally dvcriaarripiov, sometimes (3u)fx6s). The 
first altar we read of in the Bible was that erected 
by Noah on leaving the ark. According to a 
Rabbinical legend, it was partly formed from the 
remains of one built by Adam on his expulsion 
from Paradise, and afterwards used by Cain and 
Abel, on the identical spot where Abraham pre- 
pared to offer up Isaac (Zohar, In Gen. fol. 51. 3, 
4; Targum, Jonathan, Gen. viii. 20). Mention 
is made of altars erected by Abraham (Gen. xii. 
7 ; xiii. 4 ; xxii. 9) ; by Isaac (xxvi. 25) ; by Jacob 
(xxxiii. 20 ; xxxv. 1, 3) ; by Moses (Exod. xvii. 
15). After the giving of the law, the Israelites were 
commanded to make an altar of earth (nH?D 
HDIN) ; they were also permitted to employ 
stones, but no iron tool was to be applied to them. 
This has been generally understood as an inter- 
diction of sculpture, in order to guard against a 
violation of the second commandment. Altars 
were frequently built on high places (HD2, J"I1C2, 
fiafioi)', the Avoid being used not only for the 
elevated spots, but for the sacrificial structures upon 
them. Thus Solomon built an high place for Che- 
mosh (1 Kings xi. 7), and Josiah brake down and 
burnt the high place, and stamped it small to 
powder (2 Kings xxiii. 15); in which passage 
!"UD2 is distinguished from rQTft. This practice, 
however, was forbidden by the Mosaic law (Deut. 
xii. 13; xvi. 5), except in particular instances, 
such as those of Gideon (Judg. vi. 26) and David 
(2 Sam. xxiv. 18). It is said of Solomon ' that he 
loved the Lord, walking in the statutes of David, his 
father, only he sacrificed and burnt incense on the 
high places' (1 Kings iii. 3). Altars were some- 
times built on the roofs of houses : in 2 Kings 
xxiii. 12, we read of the altars that were on the 
top of the upper chamber of Ahaz. In the taber- 




nacle, and afterwards in the temple, two altars 
were erected, one for sacrifices, the other for 
incense : the table for the shew-bread is also 
sometimes called an altar. . 

1. The altar of burnt-offering (n?yn niTID) 
belonging to the tajemacle was a hollow square, 
five cubits in length and breadth, and three 
cubits in height ; it was made of Shittim-wood 
[Shittim], and overlaid with plates of brass. In 
the middle there was a ledge or projection, 
3313, deambulacrum, on which the priest stood 
while officiating ; immediately below this, a brass 
grating was let down into the altar to support the 
fire, with four rings attached, through which poles 
were passed, when the altar was removed. Some 
critics have supposed that this grating was placed 
perpendicularly, and fastened to the outward 
edge of the 3313, thus making the lower part of 
the altar larger than the upper. Others have 
imagined that it extended horizontally beyond 
the 33"D, in order to intercept the coals or 
portions of the sacrifice which might accidentally 
fall off the altar. Thus the Targumist Jonathan 
says, ' Quod si cadat frustum aut pruna ignis ex 
altari, cadat super craticulam nee pertingat ad 
terram ; turn capieut illud sacerdotes ex craticula 
et reponent in altari.' But for such a purpose 
(as Dr. Biihr remarks) a grating seems very un- 
suitable. As the priests were forbidden to go up 
by steps to the altar (Exod. xx. 26), a slope of 
earth was probably made rising to a level with 
the 2313. According to the Jewish tradition 
this was on the south side, which is not im- 
probable ; for on the east was ' the place of the 
ashes' QUHT] D1p»), Lev. i. 16, and the laver 
of brass was probably near the western side, so 
that only the north and south sides were left. 
Those critics who suppose the grating to have 
been perpendicular or on the outside, consider the 
injunction in Exod. xx. 24, as applicable to this 
altar, and that the inside was filled with earth ; 
so that the boards of Shittim-wood formed merely 
a case for the real altar. Thus Jarchi, on Exod. 
xxvii. 5,. says, ' Altare terreum est hoc ipsum 
seneum altare, cujus concavum terra implebatur 
cum castra metarentur.' 

In Exod. xxvii. 3, the following utensils are 
mentioned as belonging to the altar, all of which 
were to be made of brass. (1) JTlT'D siroth, 
pans or dishes to receive the ashes that fell 
through the grating. (2) D 1 ^ yaim, shovels (for- 
cipes, Vulg.) for cleaning the altar. (3) fllplTD 
misrakoth (basons, Auth. Vers. ; <piaKai, Sept. ; pa- 
tera sacrifica, Gesenius), vessels for receiving the 
blood and sprinkling it on the altar. (4) riWTD 
mizlagoth (' flesh-hooks,'' Auth. Vers. ; Kpedypai, 
Sept. ; fuscinulee, Vulg.), large forks to turn 
the pieces of flesh or to take them off the 
fire (see 1 Sam. ii. 13). (5) HinriD machthoth 
(J- fire-pans] Auth. Vers.; rb irvpeiov, Sept.); 
the same word is elsewhere translated censers, 
Num. xvi. 17 ; but in Exodus xxv. 38, ' snuff- 
dishes ; {nro9efj.a,Ta, Sept. 

2. The altar of burnt-offering in Solomon's 
temple was of much larger dimensions, ' twenty 
cubits in length and breadth, and ten in height ' 
(2 Chron. iv. 1), and was made entirely of brass. 
It is said of Asa that he renewed (BHri), that is, 
either repaired (in which sense the word is evi- 
dently used in 2 Chvon. xxiv. 4) or reconsecrated 
(eveKaiviffe, Sept.) the altar of the Lord that was 

before the porch of the Lord (2 Chron. xv. 8). 
This altar was removed by king Ahaz (2 Kings 
xvi. 14 ; it was ' cleansed ' ("liltO, ayi/ifa) by 
Hezekiah ; and in the latter part of Manasseh's 
reign was rebuilt (p^ ketib ; p*l keri). 

3. Of the altar of bumt-oflering in f he second 
temple, the canonical scriptures give us no in- 
formation excepting that it was erected before 
the foundations of the temple were laid (Ezra 
iii. 3, 6) on the same place where it had formerly 
been built, e<£' ov kcu irpSTepov -f]v dvcpKoSo/Mrifj.ei'oi' 
tottov (Joseph. Antiq. xi. 4. 1). From the Apo- 
crypha, however, we may infer that it was made, 
not of brass, but 'of unhewn stone, for in the 
account of the restoration of the temple service by 
Judas Maccabaeus, it is said, ' They took whole 
stones (XlQovs bKoKXripovs), according to the law, 
and built a new altar according to the former ' 
(1 Mace. iv. 47). When Antiochus Epiphanes 
pillaged Jerusalem, Josephus informs us that he 
left the temple bare, and took away the golden 
candlesticks and the golden altar [of incense] 
and table [of shew-bread], and the altar of burnt- 
offering, ra dvcrtaarripia (Antiq. xii. 5. 4). 

4. The altar of burnt-offering erected by 
Herod is thus described by Josephus {De Bell. 
Jud. v. 5. 6) : ' Before this temple stood the 
altar, fifteen cubits high, and equal both in 
length and breadth, each of which dimensions 
was fifty cubits. The figure it was built in was 
a square, and it had comers like horns (jcepa- 
roeiSeis irpoavix o>v ywvias), and the passage up 
to it was by an insensible acclivity from, the 
south. It was formed without any iron tool, nor 
did any iron tool so much as touch it at any 
time.' The dimensions of this altar are differently 
stated in the Mishna. It is there described as a 
square 32 cubits at the base ; at. the height of a 
cubit it is reduced 1 cubit each way, making it 30 
cubits square ; at 5 cubits higher it is similarly 
contracted, becoming 28 cubits square, and at 
the base of the horns, 26 cubits ; and allowing a 
cubit each way for the deambulacrum, a square 
of 24 cubits is left for the lire on the altar. Other 
Jewish writers place the deambulacrum 2 feet 
below the surface of the altar, which would cer- 
tainly be a more suitable construction. The 
Mishna states, in accordance with Josephus, that 
the stones of the altar were unhewn, agreeably to 
the command in Exod. xx. 25 ; and that they 
were whitewashed every 3'ear at. the Passover and 
the feast of tabernacles. On the south side was 
an inclined plane, 32 cubits long and 16 cubits 
broad, made likewise of unhewn stones. A pipe 
was connected with the south-west horn, through 
which the blood of the victims was discharged by 
a subterraneous passage into the brook Keclron. 
Under the altar was a cavity to receive the drink- 
offerings, which was covered with a marble slab, 
and cleansed from time to time. On the north 
side of the altar several iron rings were fixed to 
fasten the victims. Lastly, a red line was drawn 
round the middle of the altar to distinguish 
between the blood that was to be sprinkled above 
and below it. 

II. The second altar belonging to the Jewish 
Cultus was the altar of incense, "ItSpOH H3TD 
or n*lt3pn l~Q?D ; 6v(na<TTi}pioi> Qvfwijxaros, 
Sept. ; 8v/j.ta.TT}pLov, Josephus ; called also the 
golden altar (Num. iv. 11) Until rQTO. It 
was placed between the table of shew-bread 


and the golden candlestick, in the most holy- 

1. This altar in the tabernacle was made of 
Shittim-wood overlaid with gold plates, one cubit 
in length and breadth, and two cubits in height. 
It had horns (Lev. iv. 7) of the same materials ; 
and round the flat siirface was a border ("IT, croion, 
Auth. Vers. ; a-Tpeirr^v arecfxivT]!' XF^^V": Sept.) 
of gold, underneath which were the rings to 
receive ' the staves (D'HIl, <TKvr6.kaC) made of 
Shittim-wood, overlaid with gold to bear it withal ' 
Exod. xxx. 1-5 ; Joseph. Antiq. iii. 6. S). 

2. The altar in Solomon's Temple was similar, 
but made of cedar (I Kings vi. 20 ; vii. 48 ; 
1 Chron. xxix. 18) overlaid with gold. 

3. The altar in the seeond temple was taken 
away by Antiochus Epiphanes- (1 Mace. i. 23), 
and restored by Judas Maccabaeus (1 Mace, 
iv. 49). On the arch of Titus there appears no 
altar of incense - 7 it is not mentioned in Heb. ix., 
nor by Joseph. Antiq. xiv. 4. 4 (vide Tholuck 
On the Hebrews, vol. ii. p. 8 ; Biblical Cabinet, 
vol. xxxix.) (Winer's Jieahecrterbicc/i, articles 
' Altar,' ' Brandopfer altar,' ' Raucheraltar ; ' 
Bahr's Symbolik des Mosaischen Cidtus, bd. 1. 
Heidelberg, 1837).— J. E. R. 

ALTARS, FORMS OF. In the preceding 
article the reader is furnished with all the posi- 
tive information which we possess respecting the 
altars mentioned in Scripture; but as, with regard 
to material objects so frequently named as altars, 
we feel a desire to have distinct images in the 
mind, some further remarks respecting the forms 
which they probably bore, may not be unac- 

The direction to the Israelites, at the time of 
their leaving Egypt, to construct their altars 
of unhewn stones or of earth, is doubtless to be 
understood as an injunction to follow the usage 
of their patriarchal ancestors ; and not to adopt 
the customs, full of idolatrous associations, which 
they had seen in Egypt, or might see in the land 
of Canaan. As they were also strictly enjoined to 
destroy the altars of the Canaanites, it is more than 
probable that the direction was levelled against 
such usages as those into which that people had 
fallen. The conclusion deducible from this, that 
the patriarchal altars were of unhewn stones or of 
earth, is confirmed by the circumstances under 
which they were erected, and by the fact that 
they are always described as being ' built.' The 
provision that they might be made of earth, ap- 
plies doubtless to situations in which stones could 
not be easily obtained, as in the open plains and 
wildernesses. Familiar analogies lead to the 
inference that the largest stones that could be 
found in the neighbourhood would be employed to 
form the altar; but where no large stones could 
be had, that heaps of smalla' ones might be made 
to serve. 

As these altars were erected in the open air, and 
were very carefully preserved, there is at least 
a strong probability that some of those ancient 
monuments of unhewn stone, usually called Dru- 
idical remains, which are found in all parts of the 
world, were derived from the altars of primitive 
times. These are various in their forms; and their 
peculiar uses have been very much disputed. It. 
is admitted, however, that some of them must have 
been altars ; but the difficulty is, to determine 
whether these altars are to be sought in the Crom- 



lechs or the Kistvaens. In another work (Pic- 
torial Hist, of Palestine, Supp. Notes to b. iii. 
chs. i. iii. iv.) the whole subject is largely ex- 
amined in its scriptural relations ; and the author, 
through a mass of authority and illustration, there 
reaches the conclusion that the arguments pre- 
ponderate in favour of the opinion that the Crom- 
lechs are the representatives of the primitive 
altars, and that the Kistvaens (stones disposed 
in a chest-like form) are analogous to the arks 
of the Jewish ritual and of some of the pagan 
religions [Ark]. 

Cromlechs, as is well known, are somewhat in 
the form of a table, one large stone being sup- 
ported, in a horizontal or slightly inclined posi- 
tion, upon tln'ee or more, but usually three stones, 
set upright. That they were used as altars is 

almost instinctively suggested to every one that 
views them ; and this conclusion is strengthened 
when, as is often the case, we observe a small cir- 
cular hole through which probably the rope was 
run by which the victims, when slaughtered, were 
bound to the altar, as they were to the angular 
projections or 'horns' of the Jewish altar (Ps. 
cxviii. 27). It was natural that where a suffi- 
ciency of large stones could not be found, heaps of 
smaller ones should be employed; and that, when 
practicable, a large flat stone would be placed on 
the top, to give a proper level for the fire and 
the sacrifice. Such are the cairn-altars, of which 
many still remain; but as they are sometimes 
found in places where stones of large size might 
have been obtained, it seems that in later times 
such altars had a special appropriation ; and 
Toland (Hist. B. Druids, 101) shows that the 
sacred fires were burned on them, and sacrifices 
offered to Bel, Baal, or the Sun. 

The injunction that there should be no ascent by 
steps to the-afifar appears to have been impi -rl'.vtly 
understood. There are no accounts or figures of 
altars so elevated in their fabric as to require such 
steps for the officiating priests; but when altars 
are found on rocks or hills, the ascent to them is 
sometimes facilitated by steps cut in the rock. 
This, therefore, may have been an indirect v 
preventing that election of altars in high places 
which the Scriptures so often reprobate. 

It is usually supposed, however, that the effect 
of this prohibition was, that the tabernacle altar, 

1 2S 



like most ancient altars, was so low as to need no 
ascent; or else that some other kind of ascent 
was provided. The former is Calmet's view, 
the latter Lamy's. Lamy gives a sloping ascent, 
while Calmet merely provides a low standing- 
board for the officiating priest. The latter is 
probably right, foi the altar was but three cubits 
high, and was designed to be portable. There 
is one error in these and other figures of the Jewish 
altars composed from the descriptions ; namely, 
with regard to the ' horns,' which were placed 
at the comers, called ' the horns of the altar' 
(Exod. xxvii. 2; xxix. 12; 1 Kings ii. 28), and 
to which the victims were tied at the time 
of sacrifice. The word horn (j")p kereif) was 
applied by the Jews as an epithet descriptive 

known to those by whom Herod's altar was built. 
Very different figures, however, have been formed 
from these descriptions. 

of any point projecting in any direction after the 
manner of a horn (not necessarily like a horn 
in shape) ; and there is no reason to doubt 
that the horns of the successive altars of burnt- 
offerings resembled those corners projecting up- 
wards which are seen in many ancient altars. 
These are shown, in the view now given (from 
the Pictorial Bible), which, although substantially 
the same, is, in this and other respects, a con- 
siderable improvement upon that of Calmet. 

By the time of Solomon it appears to have been 
understood that the interdiction of steps of ascent 
did not imply that the altar was to be low, but 
rather that it was to be high, and that only a par- 
ticular mode of ascent was forbidden. The altar 
of the temple was not less than ten cubits high, 
and some means of ascent must have been pro- 
vided. The usual representations of Solomon's 
altar are formed chiefly from the descriptions of 
that in Herod's temple given by Josephus and the 
Rabbins ; and although this last was almost one- 
third higher • and larger than the other, it was 
doubtless upon the same model. The altar of the 
first temple had been seen, and could be described, 
by many of those who were present when that of 
the second temple was erected; and the latter was 

The first figure is taken from Calmet's original 
work, and exhibits the form which, with slight 
variation, is also preferred by Bernard Lamy, and 
by Prideaux {Connection, i. 200). It is excel- 
lently conceived; but is open to the objection 
that the slope, so far from being ' insensible,' as 
Josephus describes it, is steep and inconvenient; 
and yet, on the other hand, a less steep ascent 
to an object so elevated must have been incon- 
veniently extended. 

Calmet gives the above only as in accordance 
with the Rabbinical descriptions. His own view of 

the matter is conveyed in the annexed figure. This 
is certainly a very handsome altar in itself, but it 
would be scarcely possible to devise one more un- 
suitable for the actual, and occasionally exten- 
sive, services of the Jewish altar. None of these 
objections apply to the next figure, derived from 
Surenhusius (llishna, torn. ii. p. 261), which, for 

use and effect, far exceeds any other representation 
that has hitherto been attempted. An ascent 


by an inclined plane to an altar so high as that 
of Solomon must either have been inconveni- 
ently steep, or have had an unseemly extension — 
objections obviated by the provision of three as- 
cents, of four steps each, conducting to successive 
platforms. In the description of Ezekiel's temple, 
'steps' (JTpyO) are placed on the east side of 
the altar (Ezek. xliii. 17) ; and as it is generally 
supposed that the details of that description agree 
with those of Solomon's temple, it is on that au- 
thority the steps are introduced. If they actually 
existed, it may be asked how this was consistent 
with the law, which forbade steps altogether. The 
obvious answer is, that, as public decency was the 
ostensible ground of the prohibition (Exod. xx. 26), 
it might be supposed that it was ' not imperative 

, if steps could be so disposed that decency should 
not be violated; and that, if a law may be in- 
terpreted by the reason of its enactment, this law 
could only be meant to forbid a continuous flight 
of steps, and not a broken ascent. If it is still 
urged against this view that, according to Jo- 
sephus, the ascent in the temple of Herod was 
by an insensible slope, an answer is found in the 
fact, that, at, the time of its erection, a mode of 
interpreting the law according to the dead letter, 
rather than the spirit, had arisen ; and we have 
no doubt that even had it been then known that 
steps actually existed in Solomon's altar, or in 
that of the second temple, this would have been 
regarded as a serious departure from the strict 
letter of the law, not to be repeated in the new 
altar. In a similar way the student of the Bible 
may account for some other discrepancies between 

- the temples of Solomon and Ezekiel, and that of 



The ai.tar of incense, being very simple in 
its parts and uses, has been represented with so little 
difference, except in some ornamental details, that 
one of the figures designed from the descriptions 
may suffice. It is the same as the one inserted in 
the Pictorial Bible (Exod. xxx.) ; and, as to the 
comers (' horns '), &c, is doubtless more accurate 
than those given by Calmet and others. 

It is not our object to describe the altars of other 
nations ; but, to supply materials for comparison 
and illustration, a group of the altars of the prin- 
cipal nations of Oriental and classical antiquity 
is here introduced. One obvious remark occurs 

namely, that all the Oriental altars are square or 
oblong, whereas those of Greece and Rome are 
more usually round ; and that,' upon the whole, 
the Hebrew altars were in accordance with the 
general Oriental type. In all of them we observe 
bases with corresponding projections at the top ; 
and in some we find the true model of the ' horns,' 
or prominent and pointed angles. 

1, 2, 3. Greek. 4. Egyptian. 5. Babylonian. 
6. Roman. 7, 8. Persian. 

Not regarding the table of skew-bread as an 
altar, an account of it is reserved for the proper 
head; and other articles afford information re- 
specting the uses and privileges of the altars of 
burnt-offering and of incense [Asylum ; Censer ; 
Incense ; Sacrifice]. 

Altar at Athens. St. Paul, in his admired 
address before the judges of the Areopagus at 
Athens, declares that lie perceived that the Athe- 
nians were in all things too superstitious,* for 
that, as he was passing by and beholding their 
devotions, he found an altar, inscribed, ' To the 
Unknown God ; ' and adds, with unexpected 
force, ' Him whom ye worship without knowing 
(hv ovv dyvoovvres evcrtfielTe), I set forth unto 
you' (Acts xvii. 22, 23). The questions sug- 
gested by the mention of an altar at Athens, thus 
inscribed ' to the unknown God,' have engaged 
much attention; and different opinions have been, 
and probably will continue to be, entertained on 
the subject. 

The principal difficulty arises from this, that 
the Greek writers, especially such as illustrate 
the Athenian antiquities, make mention of many 
altars dedicated dr/vdcrrois QeoTs, to the un- 
known gods, but not of any-owe. dedicated dy- 
vdi<TTo> &e<£, to the unknown god. The passage 

* Aeio-tScu/xoveffTepovs — a word that only occurs 
here, and is of ambiguous signification, being ca- 
pable' of a good, bad, or indifferent sense. Most 
modern, and some ancient, expositors hold (hat it 
is here to be taken in a good sense (very religious'), 
as it was not the object of the apostle to give need- 
less offence. This explanation also agrees best 
with the context, and with the circumstances of 
the case. A man may be ' very religious,' though 
his religion itself may be false. 




in Lucian (Philopatr. § 9), which has often 
been appealed to as evidence that there existed 
at Athens an altar dedicated, in the singular, 
to the unknown God, dyviiffrqi 0e<3, is of little 
worth for the purpose. For it has been shown 
by Eichhom, and Niemeyer (Interp. Orat. Paul. 
Ath. in Areop. hab.'), that this witty and profane 
writer only repeats the expression of St. Paul, with 
the view of casting ridicule upon it, as he does 
on other occasions. The other passages from 
Greek writers only enable us to conclude that 
there were altars at Athens dedicated to many 
unknown gods (Pausan. i. 1 ; Philostrat. Vit. Ap. 
vi. 3). It has also been supposed that the allusion 
may be to certain anonymous altars, which were 
erected by the philosopher Epimenides, in the 
time of a terrible pestilence, as a solemn expiation 
for the country (Diog. Laert. Vit. Epimen. i. 29). 
Dr. Doddridge, among others, dwells much on 
this. But it is a strong objection to the view 
which lie has taken, that the sacrifices on these 
altars were to be offered not dyvdarrw ®e<S, but t<£ 
■Kpocr-qKovTi 0e<3, i- e. to the God to whom this 
affair appertains, or the God who can avert the 
pestilence, whoever he may be; and such, no 
doubt, would have been the inscription, if there 
had been any. But these altars are expressly 
said to have been fiafiol dvoivv^oi, i. e. anony- 
mous altars, evidently not in the sense of altars 
inscribed to the unknown God, but altars without 
any name or inscription. 

Now, since the ancient writers tell us that 
there were at Athens many altars inscribed to the 
unknown gods, Erasmus, Le Clerc, Broda?us, and 
many others, have maintained that St. Paul 
changed the plural number into the singular in 
accommodation to his purpose. Of this opinion 
was Jerome (Comment, in Tit. i. 12), who testifies 
that this inscription (which, he says, had been 
read by him) was, ®eo?s 'Acrias Kal TLvpdnriis Kal 
Aifivris, ®eoh dyvuxnois Kal ^evois, 'To the gods 
of Asia, Europe, and Africa ; to the unknown and 
strange gods.' Bretschneider. relying on this 
authority, supposes (Lex. N. T., s. v. 'dyvcoaros) 
the inscription to have been dyv&o-rois ®eo?s, 
i. e. to the gods of foreign nations, unknown to 
the Athenians ; indicating that either foreigners 
might sacrifice upon that altar to their own gods, 
or that Athenians, who were about to travel 
abroad, might first by sacrifice propitiate the 
favour of the gods of the countries they were 
about to visit. He quotes the sentiment of Ter- 
tullian : ' I find, indeed, altars prostituted to 
unknown gods, but idolatry is an Attic tenet ; 
also to uncertain gods, but superstition is a tenet 
of Rome.' To the view that such was the in- 
scription which Paul noticed, and that he thus 
accommodated it to his immediate purpose, it has 
been very justly objected that, if this interpretation 
be admitted, the whole strength and weight of the 
apostle's argument are taken away ; and that his 
assertion might have been convicted of falsity by 
his opponents. Therefore, while admitting the 
authorities for the fact, that there were altars in- 
scribed to the unknown gods, they contend that 
St. Paul is at least equally good authority, for 
the fact that one of these altars, if not more, was 
inscribed in the singular, to the unknown God. 
Chrysostom {In Acta Ap.), who objects strongly 
to the preceding hypothesis, offers the conjecture 
that the Athenians, who were a people exceedingly 

superstitious, being apprehensive that they might 
have overlooked some divinity and omitted to wor- 
ship him, erected altars in some part of their city 
inscribed to the unknown God; whence St. Paul 
took occasion to preach to the Areopagites Je- 
hovah as a God, with respect to them truly un- 
known ; but whom they yet, in some sort, adored 
without knowing him. Similar to this in essential 
import is the conjecture of Eichhom (Allgem. 
Biblioth. iii. 414) to which Niemeyer subscribes, 
that there were standing at Athens several very 
ancient altars, which had originally no inscrip- 
tion, and which were afterwards not destroyed, 
for fear of provoking the anger of the gods to 
whom they had been dedicated, although it 
was no longer known who these gods were. He 
supposes, therefore, that the inscription dyvciffry 
®ew, to an [some] unknown God, was placed ' 
upon them ; and that one of these altars was seen 
by the apostle, who, not knowing that there were 
others, spoke accordingly. To this we may add 
the notion of Kuinoel ( Act. xvii. 23), who 
considers it proved that there were several altars 
at Athens on which the inscription was written in 
the plural number ; and believes that there was 
also one altar with the inscription in the singular, 
although the fact has been recorded by no other 
writer. For no argument can be drawn from this 
silence, to the discredit of a writer, like St. Paul, 
of unimpeached integrity. The altar in question, 
he thinks, had probably been dedicated dyvdoarw 
®ecp, on account of some remarkable benefit re- 
ceived, which seemed attributable to some God, 
although it was uncertain to ichom. 

It would be improper to dismiss this subject 
without noticing the opinion of Augustine, who 
had no doubt that the Athenians, under the ap- 
pellation of the unknown God, really worshipped 
the true one. Others besides him have thought 
that the God of the Jews was the real object, of 
this altar, he being a powerful God, but not fully 
known to them, as the Jews never used his name 
in speech, but substituted 'The Lonn' for 'Je- 
hovah.' One of the warmest modern advocates 
of Augustine's opinion is Dr. Hales, who, among a 
multitude of other matters, irrelevant to his ' Chro- 
nology,' but interesting in themselves, has criti- 
cally examined this subject (vol. iii. pp. 519-531). 
Alluding to the alleged fact that Athens was 
colonized from Sais in Egypt, where there was a 
temple to Neith, the Egyptian goddess of wisdom, 
on which was the famous inscription, 'TLy&i el/j.1 
I7AN rb yiyzvos, Kal ov, Kal ecrSfxevov Kal rbv 
efxbv ■xiir'kov ovSels trco 8i/7]rbs direKd\vtpev — ' I 
am all that has been, and is, and shall be ; and 
my veil no mortal hath yet uncovered] he seems 
disposed to connect this inscription with the one 
on the Athenian altar, and to refer both to that 
remote ' unknowable' Wisdom, far beyond all 
known causes, whom the heathen dimly guessed at 
under obscure metaphors and recondite phrases ; 
but whom the Hebrews knew under the name of 

But there is no end of these hypotheses ; and 
we are content to re>t in the conclusion of Pro- 
fessor Robinson (Add. in Am. Edit, of Cal??iet) : 
' So much at least is certain, that altars to an 
unknown god or gods existed at Athens. But 
the attempt to ascertain definitively whom the 
Athenians worshipped under this appellatior 
must ever remain fruitless for want of sufficient. 


data. The inscription afforded to Paul a happy 
occasion of proclaiming the Gospel ; and those 
who embraced it found indeed that the being 
whom they had thus " ignorantly worshipped," 
was the one only living and true God.' 

ALUKAH (ni>T?J?; Sept. BSeAAa; Vulg. 
Sanguisuga ; A. V. ' Horse-leech') occurs only 
in Prov. xxx. 15 (genus, vermes; order, intesti- 
nata, Linn. Viviparous, brings forth only one 
offspring at a time : many species). ' The horse- 
leech. ' is properly a species of leech discarded for 
medical purposes on account of the coarseness of 
its bite. There is no ground for the distinction of 
species made in the English Bible. 

Although the Hebrew word is translated leech 
in all the versions, there has been much dispute 
whether that is its proper meaning. Against the 
received translation, it has been urged that, upon 
an examination of the context in which it occurs, 
the introduction of the leech seems strange ; that 
it is impossible to understand what is meant by 
its ' two daughters,' or three, as the Septuagint, 
Syriac, and Arabic versions assign to it ; and 
that, instead of the incessant craving ai^parently 
attributed to it, the leech drops off when tilled. 
In order to evade these difficulties it has been at- 
tempted, but in vain, to connect the passage either 
with the preceding cr subsequent verse. It has 
also been attempted to give a different sense to 
the Hebrew word. But as it occurs nowhere 
besides, in Scripture, and as the root from which 
it would seem to be derived is never used as a 
verb, no assistance can be obtained from the Scrip- 
tures themselves in this investigation. Recourse is 
therefore had to the Arabic. The following is the 
line of criticism pursued by the learned Bochart 
(Hierozoicon, a Rosenmiiller, iii. 785,- &c). The 
Arabic word for leech is alakah, which is de- 
rived from a verb signifying to hang or to adhere 
to. But the Hebrew word, alwkah, he would de- 
rive from another Arabic root, aluk, which means 
'fate, heavy misfortune, or impending calamity' ; 
and hence he infers that alukah properly means 
destiny, and particularly the necessity of dying 
which attaches to every man by the decree of 
God. He urges that it is not strange that 
offspring should be ascribed to this divine ap- 
pointment, since, in Prov. xxvii. 1, offspring 
is attributed to time, a day — ' Thou knowest 
not what a day may bring forth.'' And the 
Hebrews call events the children of time. We 
also speak of the womb of time. Thus, then, 
Bochart considers that destiny, or the divine de- 
cree concerning death, is here personified and 
represented as having. ' two daughters crying, 
give, give ;' namely, plNfc^, Hades, or the state 
of departed souls, and the grave. He cites Prov. 
xxvii. 20, as a parallel passage : ' Hell (sheol) 
and the grave are never full,' which the Vulgate 
renders ' inferuus et perditio.' Hence he sup- 
poses that sheol and the grave are the two 
daughters of Alukah or Destiny ; each cries ' give' 
at the same moment— the former asks for the soul, 
and the latter for the body of man in death ; both 
are insatiable, for both involve all mankind in one 
common ruin. He further thinks that both these 
are called daughters, because each of the words 
is of the feminine, or, at most, of the com- 
mon gender ; and in the 16th verse, the grave 
(sheol) is specified as one of the ' things that are 



never satisfied.' In further confirmation of this 
view, Bochart cites rabbinical writers, who state 
that by the word alukah, whicli occurs in the 
Chaldee paraphrase on the Psalms, they under- 
stand destiny to be signified; and also remark 
that it has two daughters — Eden and Gehenna, 
Paradise and Hell — the former of whom never 
has enough of the souls of the righteous, the latter 
of the souls of the wicked. 

In behalf of the received translation, it is 
urged that it is scarcely credible that all the 
ancient translators should have confounded alukah 
with alakah; tha^ it is peculiarly unlikely that 
this should have been the case with (he Septua- 
gint translator of the book of Proverbs, because 
it is believed that ' this ranks next to the trans- 
lation of the Pentateuch for ability and fidelity 
of execution ;' and that the author of it must 
have been well skilled in the two languages 
(Home's Introduction, ii. 43 : ed. 182S). It is 
further pleaded that the application of Arabic 
analogies to Hebrew words is . not decisive ; 
and finally, that the theory proposed by Bo- 
chart is not essential to the elucidation of the 
passage. In the preceding verse the writer (not 
Solomon — see verse 1) speaks of ' a generation, 
whose teeth are as swords, and their jaw-tcefh as 
knives to devotir the poor from off the earth, and 
the needy from among men ;' and then, after the 
abrupt and picturesque style of the East, espe- 
cially in their proverbs, which is nowhere more 
vividly exemplified than in this whole chapter, the 
leech is introduced as an illustration of the covet- 
ousness of sucli persons, and of the two distin- 
guishing vices of which it is the parent, avarice 
and cruelty. May not. also the ' two daughters 
of the leech, crying, Give, give,' be a figurative 
description of the two lips of the creature (for 
these it has, and perfectly formed), which are 
a part of its very complicated mouth ? It cer- 
tainly is agreeable to the Hebrew style to call the 
offspring of inanimate things daughters, for so 
branches are called daughters of trees i^Gen. 
xlix. 22 — margin). A similar use of the word 
is found in Eccles. xii. 4, ' All the daughters of 
music shall be brought low,' meaning the lips, 
front teeth, and other parts of the mouth. It is 
well remarked by Professor Paxton, that ' this 
figurative application of the entire genus is suffi- 
cient to justify the interpretation. The leech, as a 
symbol, in use among rulers of every class and in 
all ages, for avarice, rapine, plunder, rapacity, 
and even assiduity, is too well known to need il- 
lustration' (Plau. Epidic. art. 2; Cicero, ad At- 
tic. ; Horace, Ars Poet. 476 ; Theocritus, Phar- 
maceut. ; &c. &c). — J. F. D. 

ALUSH (S3*6S; Sept. Alhols), one of the 
places at which the Hebrews rested on their way 
to Mount Sinai (Num. xxxiii. 13). ' It was be- 
tween Dophkah and Rephidim. The Jewish Chro- 
nology (Seder Olam Rabba, c. 5, p. 27) makes 
it twelve miles from the former and eight from 
the latter station. The Targum of Jonathan calls 
it ' a strong fort;' and it is alleged (upon an in- 
terpretation of Exod. x\i. 30) thai in Alush the 
Sabbath was instituted, and (he first Sabbath 

AMALEK (PvpJD' a son of Eliphaa (the 
first-bom of Esau) by his concubine Tirana : he 

k 2 



was the chieftain, or Emir (Pp?fc$, Sept. riyefidov, 
Auth. V. Duke), of an Idumaean tribe (Gen. 
xxxvi. 16). 

AMALEKITES, the name of a nation inha- 
biting the country to the south of Palestine be- 
tween Idumaea and Egypt, and to the east of the 
Dead Se'a and Mount Seir. 'The Amalekites 
dwell in the land of the south' (2J3H pN3, 
Num. xiii. 29.). ' Saul smote the Amalekites 
from Havilah until thou comest to Shur, that 
is over against Egypt' (1 Sam. xv. 7). 'David 
went up and invaded the Geshurites, and, 
and the Amalekites, for those nations were of 
old the inhabitants of the land as thou goest 
to Shur, even unto the land of Egypt ' (1 Sam. 
xxvii. 8). In 1 Chron. iv. 42, it is said that 
the sons of Simeon went to Mount Seir and 
smote the rest of the Amalekites that were es- 
caped. According to Josephus (Antiq. iii. 2,§1) 
the Amalekites inhabited Gobolitis (?23, Ps. 
Ixxiii. 8 ; TsffaXa, Ta/3aAa, Stephanus Byz. ; 
Y<zf$a\-r)vti, Ta/3a\7]vfi, Euseb.) and Petra, and 
were the most warlike of the nations in those 
parts : o'l re rriv TofSohsTiv iced ttt\v Tlerpav Karoi- 
Kovi/Tes, of icaXovvrai fjikv 'A/xaXTjicTraL,^<i- 
to.toi Se tS>v tKetcre iOy&y virripxov- In another 
passage he says, 'Aliphaz had five legitimate 
sons, Theman, Omer, Saphus, Gotham, and 
Kanaz ; for Amalek was not legitimate, but by a 
concubine, whose name was Thamna. These 
dwelt in that part of Idumsea called Gobolitis, 
and that called Amalekitis, from Amalek ' (Antiq. 
ii. 1) ; and elsewhere he speaks of them as 
'reaching from Pelusium of Egypt to the Red 
Sea ' (Antiq. vi. 7). We find, also, that they had 
a settlement in that part of Palestine which was 
allotted to the tribe of Ephraim. Abdon, one of 
the judges of Israel, was buried in Pirathon, in 
the land of. Ephraim, in the mount of the Ama- 
lekites, ipbftytl. 1!"Q. In Deborah's triumphal 
ode it is said p?»JD ti'JT\V Q^ISX ^D, ' out 
of Ephraim was there a root of them against 
Amalek ' (Auth. Vers.), which Ewald (Die Poe- 
tischen Biicher des Alien Bundes, &c, Got- 
tingen, 1839, Band. i. 129) translates ' Von 
Efraim die, dercn Wurzel ist in Amaleq," 1 ' of 
Ephraim those whose root is in Amalek,' i. e. 
the Ephraimites who dwelt in the mount of the 
Amalekites. On comparing this text and Joshua 
xvi. 10, ' they drave not out the Canaanites that 
dwelt in Gezer ("If J 2), but the Canaanites dwelt 
among the Ephraimites unto this day ' — with 
1 Sam. xxvii. 8, 'David invaded the Geshurites, 
and Gezrites, and the Amalekites,' &c, — it seems 
probable that the Gezrites CHTJ) were the inha- 
bitants of Gezer ("ITJ) (v. Gesenius) ; but in that 
case David must have marched northward instead 
of southward, and the southern position of the 
Amalekites is expressly stated. The first mention 
of the Amalekites in the Bible is Gen. xiv. 7 ; 
Chedorlaomer and his confederates returned and 
came to En-mishpat, which is Kadesh, and smote 
all the country of the Amalekites, and also the 
Amorites that dwelt in Hazezon-tamar.' From 
this passage it has been inferred that the Amale- 
kites existed as an independent nation at that 
time, and were, therefore ; totally distinct from the 
descendants of the son of Eliphaz. On the other 
hand, it has been remarked that while several other 
nations are specified (' the Rephaims, the Zuzims, 
the Emims,' v. 5, ' the Horites,' v. 6, and •' the 


Amorites,' v. 7), the.pnrase ' all .the country of 
the Amalekites' Ofb'Oyn mb> _ ?3) may have 
been used by the sacred historian to denote the 
locality not then, but long afterwards, occupied 
by the posterity of Amalek (Hengstenberg's Die 
Authentic des Pentateuches, Band ii.. 305). The 
LXX. appear to have read ^"wh"^, all ilia 
princes, instead of mB^PS, all the country, 
icaTeKOipav travras tovs 'dpxovras 'A/xa\^K; a 
reading which, if correct, would be in favour of 
the former supposition. Origen says (In Nunier. 
Homil. xix.), tnterfecerunt omnes principes Ama- 
lek, Rufmus's Latin version. After starting the 
question, whether, this name belonged to two na- 
tions, without attempting to settle it, he turns 
off to its allegorical interpretation (Opera, x. 
230, Berol. 1840). The Amalekites were the 
first assailants of the Israelites after their passage 
through the Red Sea (Exod. xvii.). In v. 13 it 
is said 'Joshua discomfited Amalek and his 
people with the edge of the sword.' Amalek may 
here be employed as the name of the chief of the 
tribe, as Pharaoh was the name of the successive 
kings of Egypt, and in this case the words must 
mean the prince and his army. But if ' Amalek '• 
stand for the nation, ' his people ' must mean their 
confederates. It has been thought improbable 
that in so short a period the descendants of Esau's 
grandson could have been sufficiently numerous 
and powerful to attack the host of Israel ; but 
within nearly the same period the tribe of Ephraim 
had increased so that it could muster 40,500 men 
able to bear arms, and Manasseh 32,200 : and 
admitting in the case of the Israelites an extraor- 
dinary rate of increase (Exod. i. 12, 20), still, if 
we consider the prostrating influence of slavery on 
the national character, and the absence of warlike 
habits, it. is easy to conceive that a comparatively 
small band of marauders would be a very for- 
midable foe to an undisciplined multitude, cir- 
cumstanced as the Israelites were, in a locality so 
adapted to irregular warfare. It. appears too that 
the attack was made on the most defenceless por- 
tion of the host. ' Remember (said Moses) what 
Amalek did unto thee by the way when ye were 
come forth out of Egypt ; how he met thee by the 
way and smote the hindmost, of thee, even all that 
were feeble behind thee (Dv^rUH ; Sept. ko-ki- 
Sivres, Vulg. lassi), when thou wast faint and 
weary ' (Deut. xxv. 17). In Balaam's prophecy 
(Num. xxiv.) Amalek is denominated ' the first 
of the nations,' DIH 1W&TI. The Targumists 
and several expositors, both Jewish and Christian, 
have taken this to mean ' the first of the nations 
that warred against Israel ' (Marg. reading, Auth. 
Vers.). But it appears more agreeable to the an- 
tithetical character of Oriental poetry to interpret 
it of the rank held by the Amalekites among the 
surrounding nations, their pie-eminence as a war- 
like tribe, here contrasted with their future down- 
fall and extinction. Or if we understand the 
term ]"WN"I, of priority in time, of the antiquity 
of the nation, this would become a striking con- 
trast with 'his latter end' (WHIN). In the 
Pentateuch the Amalekites are frequently men- 
tioned in connection with the Canaanites (Num. 
xiv. 25, 43, 45), and, in the book of Judges, with 
the Moabites and Ammonites (Judg. iii. 13). 
with the Midianites (Judg. vi. 3 ; vii. 12 : ' The 
Midianites, and the Amalekites, and all the chil- 
dren of the East lay along in the valley like 


grasshoppers for multitude ; and their camels 
were without number, as the sand by the sea-side 
for multitude') ; with the Kenites, 1 Sam. xv. 6. 
By divine command, as a retribution for their 
hostility to the Israelites on leaving Egypt 
(1 Sam. xv. 2), Saul invaded their country with 
an army of 210,000 men, and 'utterly destroyed 
(D^IPin, strangely taken for a proper name in 
the Sept. : ■ko.vto. rbv Xabv Kal 'leplp. dTrenreivev) 
all the people with the edge of the sword';' but 
he preserved their Icing Agag alive, and the best 
of tljg cattle, and by this act of disobedience 
forfeited the regal authority over Israel. Josephus 
states the number of Saul's army to be 400,000 
men of Israel and 30,000 of Judah. He also 
represents Saul as besieging and taking the cities 
of the Amalekites, 'some by warlike machines, 
some by mines dug underground, and by building 
walls on the outside ; some by famine and thirst, 
and some by other methods' (Antiq. vi. 7, § 2). 
About twenty year3 later they were attacked by 
David during his residence among the Philistines 
(1 Sam. xxvii.). It is said 'that he smote the 
land and left neither man nor woman alive :' this 
language must be taken with some limitation, for 
shortly after the Amalekites were sufficiently re- 
covered from their defeat to make reprisals, and 
burnt Ziklag with fire (1 Sam. xxx.). David, on 
his return from the camp of Achish, surprised 
them while celebrating their success, ' eating, and 
drinking, and dancing,' and ' smote them from 
twilight even unto the evening of the next day, 
and there escaped not a man of them save 400 
young men which rode upon camels, and fled ' 
(1 Sam. xxx. 17). At a later period, we find 
that David dedicated to the Lord the silver and 
gold of Amalek and other conquered nations 
(2 Sam. viii. 12). The last notice of the Ama- 
lekites as a nation is in 1 Chron. iv. 43, from 
which we learn that in the days of Hezekiah, king 
of Judah, 500 men of the sons of Simeon ' went 
to Mount Seir, and smote the rest of the Ama- 
lekites that were escaped.' 

In the book of Esther, Haman is called the 
Agagite, and was probably a descendant of the 
royal line (Num. xxiv. 7 ; 1 Sam. xv. 8). Jo- 
sephus says that he was by birth an Amalekite 
(Antiq. xi. 6, § 5). 

The editor of Calmet supposes that there were 
no less than three distinct tribes of Amalekites. — 

1. Amalek the ancient, referred to in Gen. xiv. ; 

2. A tribe in the region east of Egypt, between 
Egypt, and Canaan (Exod. xvii. 8 ; 1 Sam. xv. 
&c.) ; 3. Amalek, the descendants of Eliphaz. 
No such distinction, however, appears to be 
made in. the Biblical narrative ; the national 
character is everywhere the same, and the dif- 
ferent localities in which we find the Ama- 
lekites may be easily explained by their habits, 
which evidently were such as belong to a warlike 
nomade peojde. Le Gere was one of the first 
critics who advocated the existence of more than 
one Amalek. Hengstenberg infers from 1 Chron. 
iv. 42, 43, that in a wider sense Amalekites might 
be considered as belonging to Idumaea, and urges, 
in behalf of the descent of the Amalekites from 
the son of Eliphaz, (he improbability that a people 
who acted so conspicuous a part in the Israelitish 
history should have their origin concealed, and 
be, as he terms it, ' cryeveaAoyjjTos, contrary to the 
whole plan of the Pentateuch ' (v. Die Authentic, 



&c, ii. 303). Arabian writers mention ,L«LkC« 
(JhJL*.£, UuUfc£» Amalika, Amalik, Imlik, as 

an aboriginal tribe of their country, descended 
from Ham (Abulfeda says from Shem), and more 
ancient than the Ishmaelites. They also give the 
same name to the Philistines and other Canaanites, 
and assert that the Amalekites who were con- 
quered by Joshua passed over to North Africa. 
Philo {Vita Moysis, i. 39) calls the Amalekites 
who fought with the Israelites on leaving Egypt, 
Phoenicians (QohtKes). The same writer inter- 
prets the name Amalek as meaning 'a people 
that licks up or exhausts :' 6 'Af.uxA7>K, os ^ppLi)Uiv- 
ercu Aabs eKAelxoov (Leyis Alleyar. iii. 66, Lib. 
deMiyr.Abr. 26, Cong. erud. yrat. 11). — J. E. R. 

1. AMANA (i"OtpN), a mountain mentioned 
in Cant. iv. 8. Some have supposed it to be 
Mount Amanus in Cilicia, to which the dominion 
of Solomon is alleged to have extended northward. 
But the context, with other circumstances, leaves 
little doubt that this Mount Amana was rather the 
southern part or summit of Anti-Libanus, and 
was so called perhaps from containing the sources 
of the river Amana [Abana]. 

2. AMANA, a river of Damascus T Abana] . 

1. AMARIAH (nnDS|, word of Jehovah; 
Sept. 'A/xapia, 'Apapias), mentioned in 1 Chron. 
vi. 7, in the list of the descendants of Aaron by 
his eldest son Eleazer. He was the son of Me- 
raioth and the father of Ahitub, who was (not 
the grandson and successor of Eli of the same 
name, but) the father of that, Zadok in whose 
person Saul restored the high-priesthood to the line 
of Eleazer. The years during which the younger 
line of Ithamar enjoyed the pontificate in the 
persons of Eli, Ahitub, and Abimelech (who was 
slain by King Saul at Nob) doubtless more than 
cover the time of Amariah and his son Ahitub ; 
and it is therefore sufficiently certain that they 
never were high-priests in tact, although their 
names are given to carry on the direct line of 
succession to Zadok. 

2. AMARIAH, high-priest at a later period, 
the son of Azariah, and also father of a second 
Ahitub (1 Chron. vi. 11). In like manner, in 
the same list, there are three high-priests bearing 
the name of Azariah. 

3. AMARIAH, great-grandfather of the prophet 
Zephaniah (Zeph. i. 1). 

1. AMASA (NK>»J?, a burden; Sept. 'A^ueo-- 
cra'f), son of Abigail, a sister of king David. As 
his name does not occur prior to Absalom's rebel- 
lion (2 Sam. xvii. 25), he must have been neglected 
by David in comparison with Joab and Abishai, 
the sons of his other sister Zeruiah, who had before 
then been raised to great power anil influence. 
This apparent estrangement, may perhaps be con- 
nected witli the fact that Abigail had married an 
Ishmaelite called Jether, who was the father of 
Amasa. This is the more likely, as the fact is 
pointedly mentioned (1 Chron. ii. 17), or co- 
vertly indicated (2 Sam. xvii. 25) whenever the 
name of Abigail occurs, whereas we aie quite 
ignorant who was the husband of the other sister, 
Zeruiah, and father of her distinguished SOUS. 
We may thus form a conjecture of the grounds mi 
which Amasa joined Absalom, and obtained the 
command of the rebel army. He was defeated 

/ 4 



by his cousin Joab, who commanded the army of 
David. Tnis transaction appears to have made 
David sensible of the neglect with which Amasa 
had been treated ; and he eventually offered 
him not only pardon, but the command of the 
army in the room of Joab (2 Sam. xix. 13), 
whose overbearing conduct had become intoler- 
able to him, and to whom he could not entirely 
forgive the death of Absalom. David, however, 
was too good a soldier himself to have made this 
oiler, had not Amasa, notwithstanding his defeat, 
displayed high military qualities during his com- 
mand of Absalom's army. But on the breaking 
out of Sheba's rebellion, Amasa was so tardy in 
his movements (probably from the reluctance of 
the troops to follow him), that David despatched 
Abishai with the household troops in pursuit of 
Sheba, and Joab joined his brother as a volunteer. 
When they reached ' the great stone of Gibeon, 1 
they were overtaken by Amasa with the force he 
had been able to collect. Joab thought this a fa- 
vourable opportunity of getting rid of so dangerous 
a rival, and immediately executed the treacherous 
purpose he had formed. He saluted Amasa, 
asked him of his health, and took his beard in his 
right hand to kiss him, while with the unheeded 
left hand he smote him dead with his sword. 
Joab then put himself at the head of the troops, 
and continued the pursuit of Sheba ; and such 
was his popularity with the army, that David was 
unable to remove him from the command, or call 
him to account for this bloody deed : b.c. 1022 
[Abner ; Absalom; Joab]. 

2. AMASA, a chief of Ephraim, who, with 
others, vehemently resisted the retention as pri- 
soners of the persons whom Pekah, king of Israel, 
had taken captive in a successful campaign 
against Ahaz, king of Judah (2 Chron. xxviii. 

AMASAI, the principal leader of a consider- 
able body of men from the tribes of Judah and 
Benjamin, who joined David at. Ziklag. The 
words with which David received them "indicate 
some apprehension, which was instantly dissipated 
by a fervent declaration of attachment from 
Amasai (1 Chron. xii. 16-18). 

AMATH, Emath, or Hamath, a city of Syria; 
the same with Emesa on the Orontes [Hamath]. 

AMATHITIS, the district in Syria of which 
Amath or Hamath on the Orontes was the capital 
(1 Mace. xii. 25) [Hamath]. 

AMATHUS ('Afxadovs), a fortified town beyond 
the Jordan, which the Onomast. (s. v. -<35meth) 
places 21 Roman miles south of Pella. It was taken 
by Alexander Jannaeus (Joseph. Bell. Jud. i. 4, 2 ; 
Antiq. xiii. 13, 5), and its importance is shown 
by the fact that. Gab inius made it the seat of one 
of the five jurisdictions (crvvedpia) into which he 
divided the country {Antiq. xiv. 5, 4 ; Bell. Jud. 
i. 8, 5). Josejjhus elsewhere {Antiq. xvii. 10, 6) 
mentions that a palace was burnt iy 'A/j.a6o7s on 
the Jordan, which was probably the same place. 

1. AMAZIAH (rP¥£^> strength of Jehovah; 
Sept. 'A/xecrcriaj ; Vulg. Amasias), son of Joash, and 
eighth king of Judah. He was 25 years old when 
lie began to reign, and he reigned 29 years— rfrom 
B.C. 838 to b.c. 809. He commenced his sove- 
reignty by punishing the murderers of his father ; 
and it is mentioned that he respected the law of 
Moses, by not including the children in the doom 


of their parents, which seems to show that a contrary 
practice had previously existed. In the twelfth 
year of his reign Amaziah attempted to reimpose 
upon the Edomites the yoke of Judah, which they 
had cast off in the time of Jehoram. The strength 
of Edom is evinced by the fact that Amaziah con- 
sidered the unaided strength of his own kingdom 
unequal to this undertaking, and therefore hired 
an auxiliary force of 100,000 men from the king 
of Israel for 100,000 talents of silver. This is the 
first example of a mercenary army that occurs 
in the history of the Jews. It did not, however, 
render any other service than that of giving Ama- 
ziah an opportunity of manifesting that he knew 
his true place in the Hebrew constitution, as the 
viceroy and vassal of the king Jehovah [King]. 
A prophet commanded him, in the name of the 
Lord, to send back the auxiliaries, on the ground 
that the state of alienation from God in which the 
kingdom of Israel lay, rendered such assistance 
not only useless but dangerous. The king obeyed 
this seemingly hard command, and sent the men 
home, although by doing so he not only lost their 
services, but the 100,000 talents, which had been 
already paid, and incurred the resentment of the 
Israelites, who were naturally exasperated at the 
indignity shown to them. This exasperation they 
indicated by plundering the towns and destroying 
the people on their homeward march. 

The obedience of Amaziah was rewarded by a 
great victory over the Edomites, ten thousand of 
whom were slain in battle and ten thousand more 
savagely destroyed by being hurled down from the 
high cliffs of their native mountains. But the 
Edomites afterwards were avenged ; for among the 
goods which fell to the conqueror were some of 
their idols, which, although impotent to deliver 
their own worshippers, Amaziah betook himself 
to worship. This proved his ruin. Puffed 
up by his late victories, he thought also of re- 
ducing the ten tribes under his dominion. In this 
attempt he was defeated by king Joash of Israel, 
who carried him a prisoner to Jerusalem. Joash 
broke down great part of the city wall, plundered 
the city, and even laid his hands upon the sacred 
things of the temple. He, however, left Amaziah 
on the throne, but not without taking hostages for 
his good behaviour. The disasters which Ama- 
ziah's infatuation had brought upon Judah pro- 
bably occasioned the conspiracy in which he lost 
his life. On receiving intelligence of this con- 
spiracy he hastened to throw himself into the 
fortress of Lachish ; but he was pursued and slain 
by the conspirators, who brought back his body 
' upon horses ' to Jerusalem for interment in the 
royal sepulchre (2 Kings xiv. ; 2 Chron. xxiv.). 

2. AMAZIAH, the priest of the golden calves 
at Bethel, in the time of Jeroboam II. He com- 
plained to the king of Amos's prophecies of coming 
evil, and urged the prophet himself to withdraw 
into the kingdom of Judah and jjrophesy there 
(Amos vii. 10-17). 

AMBASSADOR. The relations of the Hebrews 
with foreign nations were too limited to afford 
much occasion for the services of ambassadors. 
Still, the long course of their history affords 
some examples of the employment of such func- 
tionaries, which enable us to discover the position 
which they were considered to occupy. Of am- 
bassadors resident at a foreign court they had, of 
course, no notion ; all the embassies of which we 


read being < extraordinary,' or for special services 
and occasions, such as to congratulate a king on 
his accession or victories, or to condole with him 
in his troubles (2 Sam. viii. 15 ; x. 2; 1 Kings v. 1), 
to remonstrate in the case of wrong (Judg. xi. 12), 
to solicit favours (Num. xx. 14), or to contract 
alliances (Josh. ix. 3, sqq. ; 1 Mace, viii: IT). 

The notion that the ambassador represented the 
person of the sovereign who sent him, or the dig- 
nity of the state from which he came, did not exist 
in ancient times in the same sense as now. He 
was a highly distinguished and privileged mes- 
senger, and the inviolability of his person (2 Saim 
x. 1-5) was rather that of our heralds than of 
our ambassadors. It may have been owing, in 
some degree, to the proximity of all the nations 
with which the Israelites had intercourse, that their 
ambassadors were intrusted with few if any dis- 
cretionary powers, and could not go beyond the 
letter of their instructions. In general their duty 
was limited to the delivering of a message and 
the receiving of an answer ; and if this answer 
was such as required a rejoinder, they returned for 
fresh instructions, unless they had been authorized 
how to act or speak in case such an answer should 
be given. 

The largest act performed by ambassadors ap- 
pears to have been the treaty of alliance con- 
tracted with the Gibeonites (Josh, ix.), who were 
supposed to have come from ' a far country ;' 
and the treaty which they contracted was in 
agreement with the instructions with which they 
professed to be furnished. In allowing for the 
effect of proximity, it must be remembered that 
the ancient ambassadors of other nations, even 
to countries distant from their own, generally 
adhered to the letter of their instructions, and were 
reluctant to act on their own discretion. Generals 
of armies must not, however, be confounded with 
ambassadors in this respect. 
AMBER. [Chasmil.] 

AMBIDEXTER, one who can use the left hand 
as well as the right, or, more literally, one whose 
hands are both right hands. It was long sup- 
posed that both hands are naturally equal, and 
that the preference of the right hand, and com- 
parative incapacity of the left, are the result of 
education and habit. But it is now known 
that the difference is really physical (see Bell's 
Bridgwater Treatise on the Hand), and that 
the ambidexterous condition of the hands is not a 
natural development. 

The capacity of equal action with both hands 
was highly prized in ancient times, especially in 
war. Among the Hebrews this quality seems to 
have been most common in the tribe of Benjamin, 
as all the persons noticed as being endued with it 
were of that tribe. By comparing Judg. iii. 15, 
xx. 16, with 1 Chron. xii. 2, we may gather that 
the persons mentioned in the two former texts as 
' left-handed,' were really ambidexters. In the 
latter text we learn that the Benjamites who 
joined David at Ziklag were ' mighty men, helpers 
of the war. They were armed with bows, and 
could use both the right hand and the left in hurl- 
ing [slinging] and shooting arrows out of a bow.' 
There were thirty of them ; and as they appear to 
have been all of one family, it might almost seem as 
if the greater commonness of this power among the 
Benjamites arose from its being a hereditary pe- 
culiarity of certain families in that tribe. It may 



also partly have been the result of cultivation ; 
for although the left hand is not naturally an 
equally strong and ready instrument as the right 
hand, it may doubtless be often rendered such by 
early and suitable training. 

AMBUSCADE and AMBUSH, in military 
phraseology, are terms used promiscuously, though 
it is tmderstood that the first more properly ap- 
plies to the act, and the second to the locality, of 
a stratagem which consists mainly in the con- 
cealment of an army, or of a detachment, where 
the enemy, if he ventures, in ignorance of the 
measure, within the sphere of its action, is sud- 
denly taken at a disadvantage, and liable to be 
totally defeated. The principles which must 
guide the contrivers of an ambuscade have been 
nearly the same in all ages; embracing con- 
cealment from the observation of an finemy so as 
to create no suspicion; a position of advantage 
in case of being attacked by superior forces, and 
having the means of retreating, as well as of 
issuing forth to attack, without impediment, when 
the proper moment is arrived. The example of 
Joshua at the capture of Ai shows the art to have 
been practised among the Jews on the best possible 
principles. The failure of a first attempt was sure 
to produce increased confidence in the assailed, 
who, being the armed, but not disciplined, inhabit- 
ants of a strong place, were likely not to be under 
the control of much caution. Joshua, encamping 
within sight, but with a valley intervening, when 
he came up to make a false attack, necessarily 
appeared to disadvantage, the enemy being above 
him, and his retreat towards his own camp ren- 
dered difficult by its being likewise above him 
on the other side, and both sides no doubt very 
steep, as they are in general in the hills near 
Libanus. His men therefore fled, as directed, not 
towards the north, where the camp was, but east- 
ward, towards the plain and desert ; while in the 
hills, not behind, but on the west side, lay the 
ambuscade, in sufficient force alone to vanquish 
the enemy. This body of Israelites had not there- 
fore the objectionable route to take from behind 
the city, a movement that must have been seen 
from the walls, and would have given time to 
close the gates, if not to warn the citizens back ; 
but, rising from the woody hills, it had the short- 
est distance to pass over to come down directly 
to the gate : and, if an accident had caused fail- 
ure in the army of Joshua, the detachment could 
not itself be intercepted before reaching the camp 
of the main body ; while the citizens of Ai, pur- 
suing down hill, had little chance of returning 
up to the gates in time, or of being in a condition 
to make an etlectual onset. This example, as a 
military operation, may be cited as perfect in all 
its details. In the attempt to surprise Shechem 
(Judg. ix. 30, sqq.) the operation, so far as it 
was a military manoeuvre, was unskilfully laid, 
although ultimately successful in consequence of 
the party spirit within, and the intelligence which 
Abimelech maintained in the fortress. — C. H. S. 

AMEN (t»N ; New Test. 'Afifr). This word 
is strictly an adjective, signifying 'firm,' and, 
metaphorically, ' faithful.' Thus in Rev. iii. 
14, our Lord is called ' the amen, the faithful 
and true witness.' In Isa. lxv. 16, the Heb. 
has ' the God of amen,' which our version ren- 
ders ' the God of (ruth, 3 i. e. of fidelity. In its ad- 



verbial sense amen means certainly, truly, surely. 
It is used in the beginning of a sentence by way 
of emphasis — rarely in the Old Test. (Jer. xxviii. 
6), but often by our Saviour in the New, where 
it is commonly translated ' verily.' 1 In John's 
gospel alone it is often used by him in this way 
double, i. e. ' verily, verily.' In the end of a 
sentence it often occurs singly or repeated, espe- 
cially at the end of hymns or prayers, as ' amen 
and amen ' (Ps. xli. 14 ; lxxii. 19 ; lxxxix, 53). 
The proper signification of it in this position is to 
confirm the words which have preceded, and in- 
voke the fulfilment of them : ' so be it,' fiat ; 
Sept. jivoiTo. Hence in oaths, after the priest has 
repeated the words of the covenant or impreca- 
tion, all those who pronounce the amen bind 
themselves by the oath (Num. v. 22 ; Deut. xxvii. 
15, 17; Neh. v. 13; viii. 6; 1 Chron. xvi. 36; 
comp. Ps. cvi. 48). 

AMETHYST Ol^OSj Sept. 'A/te'fc/crros ; 

Vulg. Amethystus), a precious stone, mentioned 
in Scripture as the ninth in the breastplate of the 
high-priest (Exod. xxviii. 19; xxxix. 12); and 
the twelfth in the foundations of the New Jeru- 
salem (Rev. xxi. 20). The concurrence of various 
circumstances leave little doubt that the stone 
anciently known as the amethyst is really de- 
noted by the Hebrew word ; and as the stone so 
called by the ancients was certainly that which 
still continues to bear the same name, their iden- 
tity may be considered as established. 

The transparent gems to which this name is 
applied are of a. colour which seems composed of 
a strong blue and deep red ; and according as 
either of these prevails, exhibit different tinges of 
purple, sometime? approaching to violet, and 
sometimes declining even to a rose colour. From 
these differences of colour the ancients distin- 
guished five species of the amethyst : modern 
collections afford at least as many varieties, but 
they are all comprehended under two species, 
the Oriental Amethyst and the Occidental Ame- 
thyst. These names, however, are given to 
stones of essentially different natures; which 
were, no doubt, anciently confounded in the 
same manner. The Oriental amethyst is very 
scarce, and of great hardness, lustre, and beauty. 
It is in fact a rare variety of the adamantine 
spar, or corundum. Next to the diamond, it is 
the hardest substance known. It contains about 
90 per cent, of alumine, a little iron, and a little 
silica. Of this species, emery, used in cutting 
and polishing glass, &c, is a granular variety. 
To this species also belongs the sapphire, the 
most valuable of gems next to the diamond ; 
and of which the Oriental amethyst is merely 
a violet variety. Like other sapphires, it loses 
its colour in the fire, and comes out with so 
much of the lustre and colour of the diamond, 
that the most experienced jeweller may be de- 
ceived by it. 

The more common, or Occidental amethyst, is a 
variety of quartz, or rock crystal, and is found in 
various foims in many parts of the world, as 
India, Siberia, Sweden, Germany, Spain ; and 
even in England very beautiful specimens of 
tolerable hardness have been discovered. This 
also loses its colour in the fire. 

Amethysts were much used by the ancients 
for rings and cameos ; and the reason given by 


Pliny — because they were easily cut — 'sculpturis 
faciles' {Hist. Nat. xxxvii. 9), shows that the 
Occidental species is to be understood. The 
ancients believed that the amethyst possessed the 
power of dispelling drunkenness in those who wore 
or touched it, and hence its Greek name (' ab a pri- 
vativo et /j.e9va) ebrius sum' — Martini, Excurs. p. 
158). In like manner, the Rabbins derive its 
Jewish name from its supposed power of procuring 
dreams to the wearer, DTTI signifying < to dream ' 
(Bnickmann, Abhandlung von cler Edelsteine ; 
Hill's Theophrastus, notes ; Bochart, Hieroz. ; 
Hillier, Tract, cle xii. Gemmis in Pector. Pontif. 
Hebrceorum ; Winer, Biblisches Realioorterbuch ; 
Rosenmiiller, Mineralogy, &;c. of the Bible). 

1. AMINADAB p"13*BJ>, famulus princi- 
pis; Sept. 'A/xivaSaP), one of the ancestors of 
David and of Christ (Matt. i. 4). He was the 
son of Aram, and the father of Naasson, and of 
Elisheba, who became the wife of Aaron (Exod. 
vi. 23). 

2. AMINADAB, in Cant. vi. 12. The cha- 
riots of this Aminadab are mentioned as pro- 
verbial for their swiftness. Of himself we know 
nothing more than what is here glanced at,- from 
which he appears to have been, like Jehu, one of 
the most celebrated charioteers of his day. In 
man}' MSS. the Hebrew term is divided into two 
words DHJ *Di? 3 Ami naclib ; in which case, in- 
stead of the name of a person, it means ' of my 
willing,' or ' loyal people.' This division has been 
followed in the Syriac, by the Jews in their Spanish 
version, and by many modern translators ; but, 
taken in this way, it is difficult to assign any 
satisfactoiy meaning to the passage. See Good's 
So?ig of Songs, note on vi. 12. 

AMIR (T'P^ ; Sept. eV aKpov /j.erecapov in 
Isa. xvii. 6, and ol 'A/xoppaToi in ver. 9 ; Vulg. sum- 
mitate rami; Auth. Vers, 'uppermost bough'). 
The word occurs only in Isa. xvii. 6, 9. It has been 

usual to derive it from the Arabic jsc], and to 
take its signification fromjl**^ which means a 

general, or Emir, and hence, in the present text, the 
higher or upper branches of a tree. Gesenius admits 

that this interpretation is unsatisfactory; and Lee, 
who regards it as very fanciful, endeavours (Lex. in 
voce) to establish that it denotes the caul or sheath 
in which the fruit of the date-palm is enveloped. 
According to this view he translates the verse thus : 
' Two or three berries in the head (or upper part) 
of the caid (or pod, properly sheath), four or five 
in its fissures.'' On this he remarks : ' f]'J?D sig- 
nifies any fissure, and is also applied to those of 
rocks. If, therefore, the word TBK signifies this 
caul or pod, the word PpJJD, in the following 
context, applies well to its opening, but is quite 
unintelligible in any other sense.' This is at 
least ingenious ; and if it be admitted as a sound 
interpretation of a passage confessedly difficult, 
this text is to be regarded as affording the only 


scriptural allusion to the fact that the fruit of the 
date-palm is, (luring its growth, contained in a 
sheath, which rends as the fruit ripens, and at 
first partially, and afterwards more fully, exposes 
its precious contents [Palm]. 

AMMAN. [Rabbah.] 

AMMON. [No Ammon.] 

AMMONITES (jilSJJ »J|, D^'lBg ; Sept. 
viol 'AjjLfxdv, 'Pi.fifn.txi/irai), the descendants of the 
younger son of Lot (Gem xix. 38). They ori- 
ginally occupied a tract of country east of the, and separated from the Moabites by 
the river Arnon. It was previously in tire pos- 
session of a gigantic race called Zamzummins 
(Deut. ii. 20}, 'but the Lord destroyed them 
before the Ammonites, and they succeeded them 
and dwelt in their stead.' The Israelites, on 
reaching the borders of the Promised Land, were 
commanded not, to molest the children of Ammon, 
for the sake of their progenitor Lot. But, though 
thus preserved from the annoyance which the 
passage of such an immense host through their 
country might have occasioned, they showed 
them no hospitality or kindness ; they were there- 
fore prohibited from 'entering the congregation 
of the Lord ' («'. e. from being admitted into the 
civil community of the Israelites) ' to the tenth 
generation for ever' (Deut. xxiii. 3). This is 
evidently intended to be a perpetual prohibition, 
and was so understood by Nehemiah (Neh. 
xiii. 1). The first mention of their active hos- 
tility against Israel occurs in. Judges iii. 13: 
' The king of Moab gathered unto him the chil- 
dren of Ammon and Amalek, and went and 
smote Israel.' About 140 years later we are in- 
formed that the children of Israel forsook Jehovah 
and served the gods of various nations, including 
those of the children of Ammon, and the anger 
of Jehovah was kindled against them, and he 
sold them into the hands of the Philistines and 
of the children of Ammon. The Ammonites 
crossed over the Jordan, and fought with Judah, 
Benjamin, and Ephraim, so that ' Israel was sore 
distressed.' la answer to Jephthah's messengers 
(Judg. xi. 12), the king of Ammon charged the 
Israelites with having taken away that part of his 
territories which lay between the rivers Arnon 
and Jabok, which, in Joshua xiii. 25, is called 
'half the land of the children of Ammon,' but 
was in the possession of the Amorites when the 
Israelites invaded it; and this fact was urged by 
Jephthah, in order to prove that the charge was 
ill-founded. Jephthah ' smote them from Aroer 
to Minnith, even twenty cities, with a very great 
daughter' (Judg. xi. 33; Joseph. Antiq. v. 7). 
The Ammonites were again signally defeated by 
Saul (b.c. 1095) (1 Sam. xi. 11), and, according 
to Josephus, their king Nahash was slain {Antiq. 
vi. 5). His successor, who bore the same name, 
was a friend of David, and died some years after 
his accession to the throne. In consequence of 
the gross insult offered to David's ambassadors by 
his son Hanuu (2 Sam. x. 1 ; Joseph. Antiq. vii. 
6), a war ensued, in which the Ammonites were 
defeated, and their allies the Syrians were so 
daunted ' that they feared to help the children 
of Ammon any more' (2 Sam. x. 19). In the 
following year David took their metropolis, Kab- 
bah, and great abundance of spoil) which is pro- 
bably mentioned by anticipation in 2 Sam. viii. 



12 (2 Sam. x. 11; xii. 26-31; Joseph,' Antiq. 
vii. 7). Li the reign of Jehoshaphat (b.c. 896} 
the Ammonites joined with the Moabites and 
other tribes belonging to Mount Seir,* to invade 
Judah ; but, by the divine intervention, were led 
to destroy one another. Jehoshaphat and his 
people were three clays in gathering the spoil (2 
Chron. xx. 25). The Ammonites ' gave gifts ' 
Jo Uzziah (2 Chron. xxvi. 8), and paid a tribute 
to his son Jotham for three successive years, con- 
sisting of 100 talents of silver, 1000 measures of 
wheat, and as many of barley. When the two 
and a half tribes were carried away captive, the 
Ammonites took possession of the towns belonging 
to the tribe of Gad (Jerem. xlix. 1). ' Bands of 
the children of Ammon ' and of other nations 
came up with Nebuchadnezzar against Jerusalem 
(b.c. 607), and joined in exulting over its fall 
(Ezek. xxv. 3, 6). Yet they allowed some of the 
fugitive Jews to take refuge among them, and 
even to intermarry (Jer. xl. 11 ; Neh. xiii. 13). 
On the return of the Jews from Babylon the Am- 
monites manifested their ancient hostility by 
deriding and opposing the rebuilding of Jerusa- 
lem (Neh. iv. 3, 7, 8). Both Ezra and Nehemiah 
expressed vehement indignation against those 
Jews who had intermarried with the heathen, and 
thus transgressed the divine command (Deut. vii. 
3 ; Ezra x. ; Neh. xiii. 25). Judas Maccabseus 
(b.c. 164) fought many battles with the Ammo- 
nites, and took Jazer with the towns belonging 
to it : rr\v 'la^yp ical ras Ouyarepas avrrjs. Justin 
Martyr affirms that in his time the Ammonites 
were numerous : ' Afiavtraiv i'ari vvv no\v itXTJdos 
{Dial, cum Tryph.§ 119). Origen speaks of their 
country under the general denomination of 
Arabia. Josephus says that the Moabites and 
Ammonites were inhabitants of Ccele-Syria 
{Antiq. i. 11, §5). 

Their national idol was Molecli or Mil com, 
whose worship was introduced among the Israel- 
ites by the Ammonitish wives of Solomon (1 
Kings xi. 5, 7) ; and the high places built by 
that sovereign for this ' abomination ' were not de- 
stroyed till the reign of Josiah (b.c. 610) (2 
Kings xxiii. 13). 

Besides Nahash and Hanun, an Ammonitish 

* In 2 Chron. xx. 1, it is said, ' It came to 
pass after this also, that the children of Moab and 
the children cf Ammon, and with them [other'] 
beside the Ammonites, came against Jehoshaphat 
to battle.' Auth. Vers. D*31Dyn» would be 
correctly translated '■part (or some') of the Am- 
monites,'' as in Exod. xvii. 5, "OpTD, ' some of 
the elders; 2 Sam. xi. 17; Gen. xxxiii. 15, 
DJJIVJO, ' some of the people.' But as the 
children of Ammon had already been mentioned, 
a doubt arises as to the correctness of the present 
reading. As the inhabitants of Mount Seir are 
joined with the Moabites and Ammonites, in 
verses 10, 22, 23, possibly the word D^lwSHD, 
' some of the Edomitcs,' stood in the original 
text, or, by a slight transposition of two letters, 
we may read D^iyOHD, 'some of the Me- 
hunims ;' Sept. 4k t&v Mivaitw, a tribe men- 
tioned in 2 Chron. xxvi. 7, eVl robs Mtva'iovs. 
In the 8th verse, for 'the Ammonites gave gifts,' 
the Sent, reads tSccKav oi MiraToi Bwpa ; y, 
Manrer, Comnientariw Grammaticus 
VeLTcst., Lips. 1835, i. 210. 



king Baalis (D^JD ; Sept. BeXeiffffd and BeKurd) 
is mentioned by Jeremiah (xl. 14). Sixteen 
manuscripts read D v}Q, Baalim ; and Josephus, 
BaaAe://. (Antiq. x. 9, § 3). 

In the writings of the prophets terrible denun- 
ciations are uttered against the Ammonites on 
account of their rancorous hostility to the people 
of Israel ; and the destruction of their metropolis, 
Kabbah, is distinctly foretold (Zeph. ii. 8 ; Jer. ' 
xlix. 1-6; Ezek. xxv. 1-5, 10; Amos i. 13-15). 
These passages will be more properly noticed 
under the article Rabbah. — J. E. It. 

AMNON (JUPNt, faithful), the eldest son of 
David, by Ahinoam of Jezreel. He was born at 
Hebron, about B.C. 1056. He is only known for 
his atrocious conduct towards his half-sister Tamar, 
which his full-brother Absalom revenged two years 
after, by causing him to be assassinated while a 
guest at his table, in B.C. 1032 (2 Sam. xiii.) 

AMOMUM (ajxcaixov). This ward is" only 
found in Rev. xviii. 13, and is even there omitted 
in some MSS., probably from the homoeoteleuton. 
It denoted an odoriferous plant or seed, used in 
preparing precious ointment. It differed from the 
modern amomum of the druggists, but the exact 
species is not known (see Schleusners and Robin- 
son's Greek Lexicons). 

AMON (pDS, Jer. xlvi. 25) is the name of 
an Egyptian god, in w r hom the classical writers 
unanimously recognise their own Zeus and Ju- 
piter. The primitive seat of his worship appears 
to have been at Meroe, from which it descended 
to Thebes, and thence, according to Herodotus 
(ii. 54), was transmitted to the Oasis of Siwah 
and to Dodona ; in all which places there were 
celebrated oracles of this god. His chief temple 

and oracle in Egypt, however, were at Thebes, a 
city peculiarly consecrated to him, and which is 
probably meant by the No and No Amon of the 
prophets. He is generally represented on Egyptian 
monuments by the seated figure of a man with a 
ram's head, or by that of an entire ram, and of 
a blue colour. In honour of him, the inhabitants 
of the Thebaid abstained from the flesh of sheep, 
but they annually sacrificed a ram to him and 
dressed his image in the hide. A religious reason 
for that ceremony is assigned by Herodotus (ii. 
42); but Diodorus (iii. 72) ascribes his wearing 
horns to a more trivial cause. There appears to 


be no account of the manner in which his oracular 
responses were given; but as a sculpture at 
Qarnaq, which Creuzer has copied from the De- 
scription d'Egypte, represents his portable taber- 
nacle mounted on a boat and borne on the 
shoulders of forty priests, it may be conjectured, 
from the resemblance between several features of 
that representation and the description of the 
oracle of Jupiter Ammon in Diodorus, xvii. 50, 
that his responses were communicated by some 
indication during the solemn transportation of 
his tabernacle. 

As for the power which was worshipped under 
the form of Amon, Macrobius asserts (Saturnal. 
i. 21) that the Libyans adored the setting sun 
under that of their Ammon ; but he points to the 
connection between the ram's horns of the god 
and Aries in the Zodiac. Jablonski, however, 
has endeavoured to show that Amon represented 
the sun at the vernal equinox (Pantheon, i. L65, 
sqq.). This again has been questioned by Jo- 
mard (in the Descript. (VEgypte), who maintains 
that the ancient vernal equinox was in Taurus, 
and considers Amon to denote the overflow of the 
Nile at the autumnal equinox. The precise 
ground of this objection is not apparent ; tor the 
Egyptian year was movable, and in every 119 
years the vernal equinox must have fallen in a 
different sign of the Zodiac (Ideler, TIandbuch 
der Chronologie, i. 94). But Creuzer {Symbolik, 
ii. 295) still adheres to Jablonski's opinion ; and 
the fact that Amon bears some relation to the sun 
seems placed beyond doubt by enchorial inscrip- 
tions, in which Amon Ra is found, Ra meaning sun 
(Kosegarten, De Prisca JEgyptiorum Literatura, 
p. 31). F. S. de Schmidt also, in his essay De 
Zodiaci Origine JEgyptia, p. 33, sqq. (inserted in 
his Opuscida quibus Res JEgyptiacce illustrantur, 
CarolsruliEe, 1765), endeavours by other argu- 
ments to prove the connection between Amon and 
Aries. In doing this he points out the coinci- 
dence of the festival of Amon, and of the sacrifice 
of the ram, with the period and with the kind of 
offering of the Jewish Passover, as if the appoint- 
ment of the Paschal lamb was in part Intended to 
separate the Jews more entirely from the Egyp- 
tians. For this he not only cites the passage of 
Tacitus, cceso ariete velut in contumeliam Ham- 
monis (Hist. v. 4), but adduces an extract to the 
same effect from Rabbi Abrah. Seba ; B'ahr, how- 
ever (in his Symbolik cles Mosdischen Cultus, ii. 
641), when objecting to Baur's attempt to draw a 
similar parallel between the festival of Amon and 
the Passover, justly remarks that the Hebrew text, 
besides allowing the Paschal offering to be a kid, 
always distinguishes between a male lamb and a 
ram, and that the latter is not the sacrifice of the 
Passover (Ibid. p. 296). 

The etymology of the name is obscure. Eus- 
tathius says that, according to some, the word 
means shepherd. Jablonski proposed an etymology 
by which it would signify producing light ; and 
Champollion, in his latest interpretation, assigned 
it the sense of hidden. There is little doubt that 
the pointed Hebrew text correctly represents the 
Egyptian name of the god, and, besides what may 
be gathered from the forms of the name in the 
classical writers, Kosegarten argues that the en- 
chorial Amn was pronounced Amon, because 
names in which it forms a part are so written in 
Greek, as 'Afj.ovpaa6v6r]p. Moreover, 'Afxuv and 


*kfiovv are found in Iamblicus and Plutarch ; 
and the latter expressly says that the Greeks 
changed the native name into ''A/j./u.wy. 

There is no reason to doubt that, the name of 
this god really occurs in the passage ' Behold, I 
will visit Amon of No,' in Jer. xlvi. 25. The 
context and all internal grounds are in favour of 
this view. The Sept. has rendered it by 'Afxp-dv, 
as it has also called No, in Ezek. xxx. 14, Ai6<r- 
■rroXis. The Peshito likewise takes it as a pro- 
per name, as f|OX does not exist in Syriac in the 
signification which it bears as a pure Hebrew word. 
The Targum of Jonathan and the Vulgate, how- 
ever, have rendered the passage ' the multitude of 
Alexandria.' The reason of their taking jlftN 
to mean 'multitude ' may perhaps be found in the 
fact that, in Ezek. xxx. 15, we read JIGD, 
which does bear that sense. Nevertheless, modern 
scholars are more disposed to emend the latter 
reading by the former, and to find Amon, the 
Egyptian god, in both places. — J. N. 

AMON (jlftX, artificer'), son of Manasseh, and 
fourteenth king of Judah, who began to reign b.c. 
644, and reigned two years. He appears to have 
derived little benefit from the instructive example 
which the sin, punishment, and repentance of his 
father offered ; for he restored idolatry, and again 
set up the images which Manasseh had cast down. 
He was assassinated in a court conspiracy ; but 
the people put the regicides to death, and raised 
to the throne his son Josiah, then but eight years 
old (2 Kings xxi. 19-26 ; 2 Chron. xxxiii. 21-25). 
AMORITES Clb^H; Sept. 'Apop^cuoi), 
the descendants of one of the sons of Canaan : 
"HON ; Sept. rhv ' hfioppatov ; Auth. Vers, the 
Emorite. They were the most powerful and dis- 
tinguished of the Canaanitish nations. We find 
them first noticed in Gen. xiv. 7 — ' the Amorites 
that dwelt in Hazezon-tamar,' "Idfi JWfl, the 
cutting of the palm-tree, afterwards called En- 
gedi, '•"lirpy, fountain of the kid, a city in the 
wilderness of Judaea not far from the Dead Sea. 
In the promise to Abraham (Gen. xv. 21), the 
Amorites are specified as one of the nations whose 
country would be given to Ins posterity. But at 
that time three confederates of the patriarch be- 
longed to this tribe ; Mamie, Aner, arid Eshcol 
(Gen. xiv. 13, 24). When the Israelites were 
about to enter the promised land, the Amorites 
occupied a tract on both sides of the Jordan. 
That part of their territories which lay to the east 
of the Jordan was allotted to the tribes of Reuben, 
Gad, and half the tribe of Manasseh. They were 
under two kings — Sihon, king of Heshbon (fre- 
quently called king of the Amorites), and Og, 
king of Bashan, who ' dwelt at Ashtaroth [and] 
in [at] Edrei,' yTIHZ niftVyH (Deut. i. 4, 
compared with Josh. xii. 4 ; xiii. 12). Before 
hostilities commenced messengers were sent to 
Sihon, requesting permission to pass through his 
land ; but Sihon refused, and came to Jahaz and 
fought with Israel ; and Israel smote him with 
the edge of the sword, and possessed his land from 
Amon (Modjeb) unto Jabbok (Zerka) (Num. 
xxi. 24). Og also gave battle to the Israelites at 
Edrei, and was totally defeated. After the cap- 
ture of Ai, five kings of the Amorites, whose do- 
minions lay within the allotment of the tribe of 
Judah, leagued together to wreak vengeance on 
the Gibeonites for having made a separate peace 



with the invaders. Joshua, on being apprised of 
their design, marched to Gibeon and defeated 
them with great slaughter (Josh. x. 10). Another 
confederacy was shortly after formed on a still 
larger scale ; the associated forces are described 
as ' much people, even as the sand upon the sea- 
shore in multitude, with horses and chariots very 
many' (Josh. xi. 4). Josephus says that they 
consisted of 300,000 armed foot-soldiers, 10,000 
cavalry, and 20,000 chariots (Antiq. v. 1). 
Joshua came suddenly upon them by the waters 
of Merom (the lake Samachonites of Josephus, 
Antiq. v. 6, § 1, and the modern Bahrat-al- 
Hulej, and Israel smote them until they left 
none remaining (Josh, xi. 8). Still, after their 
severe defeats, the Amorites, by means of their 
war-chariots and cavalry, confined the Danites to 
the hills, and would not suffer them to settle in 
the plains : they even succeeded in retaining 
possession of some of the mountainous parts. 

' The Amorites would (?N1* obstinaverunt se, 
J. H. Michaelis) dwell in Mount Heres in Aija- 
lon, and in Shaalbim, yet the hand of the house 
of Joseph prevailed, so that they became tribu- 
taries. And the coast of the Amorites .was from 
the going up to Akrabbim, D'OlpJ? TOVO (the 
steep of Scorpions) from the rock and upwards ' 
(Judg. i. 34-36). It is mentioned as an extra- 
ordinary circumstance that in the days of Samuel 
there was peace between Israel and the Amorites 
(1 Sam. vii. 14). In Solomon's reign a tribute 
of bond-service was levied on the remnant of the 
Amorites and other Canaanitish nations (1 Kings 
ix. 21 ; 2 Chron. viii. 8). 

A discrepancy has been supposed to exist be- 
tween Deut. i. 44, and Num. xiv. 45, since in the 
former the Amorites are said to have attacked the 
Israelites, and in the latter the Amalekites ; the 
obvious explanation is, that in the first passage 
the Amalekites are not mentioned, and the Amo- 
rites stand for the Canaanites in the second pas- 
sage. From the language of Amos (ii. 9) it has 
been inferred that the Amorites in general were 
men of extraordinary stature, but perhaps the 
allusion is to an individual, Og, king of Bashan, 
who is described by Moses as being the last ' of 
the remnant of the giants.' His bedstead was of 
iron, ' nine cubits in length and four cubits in 
breadth ' (Deut. iii. 21). Though the Gibeonites 
in Josh. ix. 7, are called Hivites, yet in 2 Sam. 
xxi. 2, they are said to be ' of the remnant of the 
Amorites,'' probably because they were descended 
from a common stock, and were in subjection to 
an Amoritish prince, as we do not read of any 
king of the Hivites. — J. E. R. 

AMOS (D1DJJ), carried, or a burden; one 
of the twelve minor prophets, and a contem- 
porary of Isaiah and Hosea. Gesenius conjec- 
tures that the name may be of Egyptian origin, 
and the same as Amasis or Amosis, which means 
son of the moon (v. Gesenii Thesaur. s. v. D12J7 
and flBfo). He was a native of Tekoah, about 
six miles S. of Bethlehem, inhabited chiefly 
by shepherds, to which class he belonged, being 
also a dresser of sycamore-trees. Though 
some critics have supposed that he was a 
native of the kingdom of Israel, and took re- 
fuge in Tekoah when persecuted by Amaziah ; 
yet a comparison of the passages Amos i. 1 ; vii. 
14, with Amaziah "s language vii. 12, leads us tc 



believe that he was born and brought up in that 
place. The period during which he filled the 
prophetic office was of short duration, unless we 
suppose that he uttered other predictions which 
are not recorded. It is stated expressly that he 
prophesied in the days of Uzziah, king of Judah, 
and in the days of Jeroboam, the son of Joash, 
king of Israel, two years before the earthquake 
(Amos i. 1). As Jeroboam died in the fifteenth 
year of Uzziah's reign, this earthquake, to which 
there is an allusion in Zechariali (xiv. 5), could 
not have happened later than the seventeenth year 
of Uzziah. Josephus indeed (Antiq. ix. 10) and 
some other Jewish writers represent the earthquake 
as a mark of the divine displeasure against 
Uzziah (in addition to his leprosy) for usurping 
the priest's office. This, however, would not 
agree with the sacred narrative, which informs us 
that Jotham, his son, acted as regent during the 
remainder of his reign, was twenty-five years old 
when he became his successor, and consequently 
was not born till the twenty-seventh year of his 
father's reign. As Uzziah and Jeroboam were 
contemporaries for about fourteen years, from B.C. 
798 to 784, the latter of these dates will mark the 
period when Amos prophesied. 

In several of the early Christian writers, Amos 
the prophet is confounded with Amoz CpfDK), 
the father of Isaiah. Thus Clement of Alexandria 
(Strom, l. 21, § 118), ivpo<pf}T£vov(Ti 5e en-' aurov 
'A/ius kou 'Haaias 6 vlbs avrov : this mistake 
arose from their ignorance, of Hebrew, and from 
the name 'Apas being applied to both in the 
Septuagint. In our Authorized Version the names 
are, as above, correctly distinguished, though, 
strange to say, some commentators have asserted 
that the two individuals are named alike. 

When Amos received his commission, the king- 
dom of Israel, which had been ' cut short ' by 
Hazael (2 Kings x. 33) towards the close of 
Jehu's reign, was restored to its ancient limits 
and splendour by Jeroboam the Second (2 
Kings xiv. 25). But the restoration of na- 
tional prosperity was followed by the prevalence 
of luxury, licentiousness, and oppression, to an 
extent that again provoked the divine displeasure, 
and Amos was called from the sheep-folds to be 
the harbinger of the coming judgments. Not that 
his commission was limited entirely to Israel. 
The thunder-storm (as Riickert poetically ex- 
presses it) rolls over all the surrounding king- 
doms, touches Judah in its progress, and at length 
settles upon Israel. Chap. i. ; ii. 1-5, form a 
solemn prelude to the main subject; nation after 
nation is summoned to judgment, in each instance 
with the striking idiomatical expression (similar 
to that in Proverbs xxx. 15, 18, 21, and to the 
rph koI rerpaKts, the terque quaterque of the 
Greek and Roman poets), ' For three transgres- 
sions — and for four — I will not turn away the 
punishment thereof.' Israel is then addressed in 
the same style, and in chap. iii. (after a brief 
rebuke of the twelve tribes collectively) its de- 
generate state is strikingly portrayed, and the 
denunciations of divine justice are intermingled, 
like repeated thunder-claps, to the end of chap, 
vi. The seventh and eighth chapters contain 
various symbolical visions, with a brief historical 
episode (vii. 10-17). In the ninth chapter the 
majesty of Jehovah and the terrors of his justice 
are set forth with a sublimity of diction which 


rivals and partly copies that of the royal Psalmist 
(comp. vers. 2, 3, with Ps. cix., and ver. 6 with Ps. 
civ.). Towards the close the scene brightens, and 
from the eleventh verse to the end the promises of 
the divine mercy and returning favour to the 
chosen race are exhibited in imagery of great 
beauty taken from rural life. 

The allusions in the writings of this prophet 
are numerous and varied ; they refer to natural 
objects, as in iii. 4, 8 ; iv. 7, 9 ; v. 8 ; vi. 12 ; 
ix. 3 : to historical events, i. 9, 11, 13; ii. 1; 
iv. 11 ; v. 26 : to agricultural or pastoral employ- 
ments and occurrences, i. 3; ii. 13; iii. 5, 12; 
iv. 2, 9 ; v. 19 ; vii. 1 ; ix. 9, 13, 15 : and to 
national institutions and customs, ii. 8 ; iii. 15 ; 
iv. 4 ; v. 21 ; vi. 4-6, 10 ; viii. 5, 10, 14. 

Some peculiar expressions occur ; such as 
' cleanness of teeth,' a parallelism to ' want of 
bread,' vi. 6. ' God of Hosts ' is found only in 
Amos and the Psalms. ' The high places of 
Isaac,' vii. 9 ; 'the house of Isaac,' vii. 16. 'He 
that createth the wind,' iv. 13. In the ortho- 
graphy there are a few peculiarities, as 2XHD 
for 3jmD, vi. 8; D3DK>U for DDDD^3, v. 11; 
pnb» for prT^ (found also in Ps. cv. r and 
Jerem. xxxiii.). 

The evidence afforded by the writings of this 
prophet that the existing religious institutions both 
of Judah and Israel (with the exception of the 
corruptions introduced by Jeroboam) were framed 
according to the rules prescribed in the Penta- 
teuch, and the argument hence arising for the 
genuineness of the Mosaic records, are exhibited 
very lucidly by Dr. Hengstenberg in the second 
part of his Beitrcige zur Einleitung ins Alte 
Testament (Contributions to an Introduction to 
the Old Testament) — Die Authentie des Pen- 
tateuches (The Authenticity of the Pentateuch), 
i. p. 83-125. 

The canonicity of the book of Amos is amply 
supported both by Jewish and Christian autho- 
rities. Philo, Josephus, and the Talmud include 
it among the minor prophets. It is also in the 
catalogues of Melito, Jerome, and the 60th canon 
of the Council of Laodicea. Justin Martyr, in 
his Dialogue with Trypko (5 22), quotes a con- 
siderable part of the 5th and 6th chapters, which 
he introduces by saying, aKovcrare ir&s irepl 
tovtwv \eyet. Sia 'A ( aws evbs tuv ScSSsKa — ' Hear 
how he speaks concerning these by Amos, one of 
the twelve.' There are two quotations from it in 
the New Testament : the first (v. 25, 26) by the 
proto-martyr Stephen, Acts vii. 42; the second (ix. 
11) by the apostle Jame3, Acts xv. 16. — J. E. R. 

AMOSIS, an Egyptian monarch, the founder 
of the eighteenth dynasty, who ascended the throne 
in n.c. 1575. The period of his accession, and 
the change which then took place in the reigning 
family, strongly confirm the opinion of his being 
the 'new king who knew not Joseph' (Exod. i. 8) ; 
and if it be considered that he was from the dis- 
tant province of Thebes, it is reasonable to expect 
that the Hebrews would be strangers to him, and 
that he would be likely to look upon them with 
the same distrust and contempt with which the 
Egyptians usually regarded foreigners (Wilkin- 
son's Anc. Egyptians, i. 48; also Sharpe's Early 
Hist, of Egypt, pp. 12, 48) [Egypt]. 

AMPHIPOLIS Qhj.i.<plTToXis), a city of Greece, 
through which Paul and Silas passed on their -way 
from Philippi to Thessalonica (Acts xvii. 1). It 


was situated on the left bank of the river Strymon, 
just below its egress from the lake Kerkine (now 
Takino), and about three miles above its influx 
into the sea. This situation upon the banks of a 
navigable river, a short distance from the sea, with 
the vicinity of the woods of Kerkine, and the gold- 
mines of Mount Pangaeus, rendered Amphipolis 
a place of much importance, and an object of 
contest between the Thracians, Athenians, Lace- 
daemonians, and Macedonians, to whom it suc- 
cessively belonged. It has long been in ruins ; 
and a village of about one hundred houses, called 
Jeni-keui, now occupies part of its site (Thucyd. 
i. 100 ; iv. 102, sq. ; Herod, vii. 117 ; Diod. Sic. 
xvi. 8 ; Appian. iv. 104, sq. ; Plin. iv. 17 ; Liv. 
xlv. 29 ; Cellar. Notit. i. 1053, sq.). 

AMRAM, son of Kohath, of the tribe of Levi. 
He married his father's sister Jochebad, by whom 
•he had Aaron, Miriam, and Moses. He died in 
Egypt, at the age of 137 years (Exod. vi.). 

AMRAPHEL, king of Shinar, one of the four 
kings who invaded Palestine in the time of Abra- 
ham (Gen. xiv. 1, 2, sq.) [Abraham ; Che- 

AMULET (probably from the Arabic <3U=>^ 

a pendant; Isa. iii. 20, QWrb; Talm. niJ?Dp). 
Erom the earliest ages the Orientals have believed 
in the influences of the stars, in spells, witchcraft, 
and the malign power of the evil eye; and to 
protect, themselves against the maladies and other 
evils which such influences were supposed to occa- 
sion, almost all the ancient nations wore amulets 
(Plin. Hist. Nat. xxx. 15). These amulets con- 
sisted, and still consist, chiefly of tickets inscribed 
with sacred sentences (Shaw, i. 365 ; Lane's 
Mod. Egypt, ii. 365), and of certain stones (comp. 
Plin. Hist. Nat. xxxvli. 12, 34) or pieces of metal 
(Richardson, Dissertation ; D'Arvieux, iii. 208 ; 
Chardin, i. 243, sqq. ; iii. 205 sqq. ; Niebuhr, 
i. 65; ii. 162). Not only were persons thus pro- 
tected, but even houses were, as they still are, 
guarded from supposed malign influences by cer- 
tain holy inscriptions upon the doors. 



1. Modern Oriental. 2, 3, 4, 5. Ancient Egyptian. 

The previous existence of these customs is im- 
plied in the attempt of Moses to turn them to 
becoming uses, by directing that certain pas- 
sages extracted from the law should be employed 
(Exod. xiii. 9, 16 ; Deut. vi. 8 ; xi. 18). The door- 

schedules being noticed elsewhere [Mezuzoth], 
we here limit our attention to personal amu- 
lets. By this religious appropriation the then 
all-pervading tendency to idolatry were in this 
matter obviated, although in later times, when 
the tendency to idolatry had passed away, such 
written scrolls degenerated into instruments of 
superstition. . 

The tiWrb of Isa. iii. 20 (Sept. TrepiUl-to.; 
Vulg. inaures ; Auth. Vers, earrings), it is now 
allowed, denote amulets, although they served also 
the purpose of ornament. They were probably pre- 
cious stones, or small plates of gold or silver, with 
sentences of the law or magic formulas inscribed on 
them, and worn in the ears, or suspended by a chain 
round the neck ' Earrings ' is not perhaps a bad 

[Egyptian Ring and Earring Amulets.] 

translation. It is certain that earrings were some- 
times used in this way as instruments of super- 
stition, and that at a very early period, as in Gen. 
xxxv. 4, where Jacob takes away the earrings of 
his people along with their false gods. Earrings, 
with strange figures and characters, are still used 
as charms in the East (Chardin, in Harmer, iii. 
314). Augustin speaks strongly against earrings 
that were worn as amulets in his time (Epist. 75, 
ad Fos.). Schroeder, however, deduces from 
the Arabic that these amulets were in the form of 
serpents, and similar probably to those golden 
amulets of the same form which the women of the 
pagan Arabs wore suspended between their breasts, 
the use of which was interdicted by Mohammed 
(Schroeder, De Vestitu Mulicrum. cap. xi. pp. 172, 
173 ; Grotefend, art. Amulete, in Ersch and G ru- 
ber's Encyclop.; Rosenmuller, ad Isa. iii. 20 : Ge- 
senius, adeund.; and in his Thesaurus, ait. KfP). 
That these lechashim were charms inscribed on 
silver and gold was the opinion of Aben Ezra. 
The Arabic has boxes of amulets, manifestly con- 
eluding that they were similar to those ornamental 
little cases for written charms which are still used 
by Arab women. This is represented in the 
first figure of cut 1. Amulets of this kind 




are called hhegab, and are specially adapted to 
protect and preserve those written charms, on 
which the Moslems, as did the Jews, chiefly 
rely. The writing is covered with waxed cloth, 
and enclosed in a case of thin embossed gold 
or silver, which is attached to a silk string, or a 
chain, and generally hung on the right side, above 
the girdle, the string or chain being passed over 
the left shoulder. In the specimen here figured 
there are three of these hhegabs attached to one 
string. The square one hi the middle is almost 
an inch thick, and contains a folded paj)er ; the 
others contain scrolls. Amulets of this shape, or 
of a triangular form, are worn by women and 
children ; and those of the latter shape are often 
attached to children's head-dress (Lane's Modern 
Egyptians, ii. 365). 

The superstitions connected with amulets grew 
to a great height in the later periods of the Jewish 
history. ' There was hardly any people in the whole 
world,' says Lightfoot (Hor. Hebr. ad Matt. xxiv. 
24), ' that more used or were more fond of amulets, 
charms, mutteririgs, exorcisms, and all kinds of 
enchantments. . • . The amulets were either little 
roots hung about the neck of sick persons, or, what 
was more common, bits of paper (and parchment), 
with words written on them, whereby it was sup- 
posed that diseases were either driven away or 
cured. They wore such amulets all the week, but 
were forbidden to go abroad with them on the 
Sabbath, unless they were ' approved amulets,' 
that is, were prescribed by a person who knew 
that at least three persons had been cured by the 
same means. In these amulets mysterious names 
and characters were occasionally employed, in 
lieu of extracts from the law. One of the most 
usual of these was the cabalistic hexagonal figure 
known as " the shield of David " and '•' the seal of 
Solomon" ' (Bartolocc. Bibliotheca Rabbinica, i. 

576; Lakemacher, Observatt. Philol. ii. 143, 
sqq.). The reputation of the Jews was so well 
established in this respect, that even in Arabia, 
before the time of Mohammed, men applied to 
them when they needed charms of peculiar virtue 
(Mischat-ul-Masabih, ii. 377). 

ANAB (22]}), one of the cities in the moun- 
tains of Judah. from which Joshua expelled the 
Anakim (Josh. xi. 21 ; xv. 15). From Main 
(the Maon of Scripture) Dr. Robinson (Re- 
searches, ii. 195) observed a place of this name, 
distinguished h}' a small tower. 

ANAH (iljy. ; Sept. 'Avd), son of Zibeon the 

Hivite, and father of Esau's wife Aholibamah 
(Gen. xxxvi. 24). While feeding asses in the 
desert he discovered ' warm springs ' (aquce ca- 
idce), as the original D^C is rendered by Jerome, 
who states that the word had still this signification 

in the Punic language. Gesenius and most 
modem critics think this interpretation correct, 
supported as it is by the fact that warm springs 
are still found in the region east of the Dead Sea. 
The Syriac has simply 'waters,' which Dr. Lee 
seems to prefer. Most of the Greek translators 
retain the original as a proper name la/jLei/u., pro- 
bably not venturing to translate. The Samaritan 
text, followed by the Targums, has ' Emims,' 
giants. Our version of ' mules ' is now generally 
abandoned, but is supported by the Arabic and 
Veneto-Greek versions. 

ANAKIM (D*j?:jp, or Benei-Anak C*J£ 
pJJ?) and Benei-Anakim (D^iT^l), a wan- 
dering nation of southern Canaan, descended 
from Anak, whose name it bore (Josh. xi. 21). 
It was composed of three tribes, descended from 
and named after the three sons of Anak — Ahir 
man, Sesai, and Talmai. When the Israelites 
invaded Canaan, the Anakim were in possession 
of Hebron, Debir, Anak, and other towns in the 
country of the south. Their formidable stature 
and appearance alarmed the Hebrew spies ; but 
they were eventually overcome and expelled by 
Caleb, when the remnant of the race took refuge 
among the Philistines (Num. xiii. 23 ; Deut. 
ix. 2; Josh. xi. 21 ; xiv. 12; Judg. i. 20). This 
favours the opinion of those who conclude that 
the Anakim were a tribe of Cushite wanderers 
from Babel, and of the same race as the Philis- 
tines, the Phoenicians, the Philitim, and the 
Egyptian shepherd-kings. 

ANAMME'LECH 0$gfl8J, 2 Kings xvii. 31) 
is mentioned, together with Adrammelech, as a 
god of the people of Sepharvaim, who colonized 
Samaria. He was also worshipped by the sacrifice 
of children by fire. No satisfactory etymology 
of the name has been discovered. Hyde (Ret. Vet. 
Persar. p. 12S) considers the first part of the 
word to be the Aramaean &}]} or jy sheep, and 
the latter to he king (although, from his rendering 
the compound Pecus Rex, it is not at all clear 
in what relation he considered the two elements 
to stand to each other). He takes the whole 
to refer to the constellation Cepheus, or to that 
part .of it in which are the stars called by the 
Arabs the shepherd and the sheep (ar Rui wal 
Ganam), which Ulug Beg terms the stars of the 
flock (Kaivukib id Firq). This theory is erro- 
neously stated both by Gesenius and Winer 
(by the former in his Thesaurus, and by the 
latter in his Realicorterbuch), who make out 
that the constellation Cepheus itself is called 
by the A'abs the shepherd and his sheep. Hyde 
certainly does not say so ; and al Qazwini (in 
Ideler's TJntersuchungen vber die Sterjinamen, 
p. 42) expressly assigns the name of ' the shepherd ' 
to the star in the left foot of Cepheus ; that of ' the 
sheep ' (al Agnum, as he calls it) to those between 
his feet ; and that of ' the flock ' to the one on his 
right shoulder. The most that can be said of 
Hyde's theory is, that it is not incompatible with 
the astrology of the Assyrians. Gesenius, in the 
etymology he proposes, considers the first part of 
the name to be the Arabic canam, ' image,' with 
a change of y into ]}, which is not unusual in 
Aramaic (seeEwald's Hebr. Grammar, §. 106). 
The latest etymology proposed is that by Benfey 
(Monatsnamen einiger alter Volker, p. 188), who 
suggests that the first part of the word may be 




an- abbreviation of the name of the Persian goddess 
Anahit, or of that of the Ized Aniran. The same 
obscurity prevails as to the form tinder which the 
god was worshipped. The Babylonian Talmud 
states that his image had the figure of a horse ; but 
Kimclii says that of a pheasant, or quail (Carp- 
zov's Apparatus, p. 516). — J. N. 

ANANIAS, son of Nebedaeus, was made high- 
priest in the time of the procurator Tiberius 
Alexander, about a.d. 47, by Herod, king of 
Chalcis, who for this purpose removed Joseph, son 
of Camydus, from the high-priesthood (Joseph. 
Antiq. xx. 5, 2). He held the office also under 
the procurator Curnanus, who succeeded Tiberius 
Alexander. Being implicated in the quarrels of 
the Jews and Samaritans, Ananias was, at the in- 
stance of the latter (who, being dissatisfied with 
the conduct of Cumanus, appealed to Ummidius 
Quadratus, president of Syria), sent in bonds to 
Rome, to answer for hia conduct before Claudius 
Caesar. The emperor decided in favour of the 
accused party. Ananias appears to have returned 
with credit, and to have remained in his priest- 
hood until Agrippa gave his office to Ismael, 
the son of Tabi {Antiq. xx. 8, 8), who suc- 
ceeded a short time before the departure of the 
procurator Felix, and occupied the station also 
under his successor Festus. Ananias, after re- 
tiring from his high-priesthood, ' increased in 
glory every day ' (Antiq. xx. 1, 2), and ob- 
tained favour with the citizens, and with Albinus, 
the Roman procurator, by a lavish use of the great 
wealth he had hoarded. His prosperity met with 
a dark and painful termination. The assassins 
(sicarii), who played so fearful a part in the 
Jewish war, set fire to his house in the commence- 
ment of it, and compelled him to seek refuge by 
concealment ; but being discovered in an aque- 
duct, he was captured and slain (Antiq. xx. 9, 2; 
Bell. Jiul. ii. 17, 9). 

It was this Ananias before whom Paul was 
brought, in the procuratorship of Felix (Acts 
xxiii.). The noble declaration of the apostle, ' I 
have lived in all good conscience before God until 
this day,' so displeased him, that he commanded 
the attendant to smite him on the face. Indig- 
nant at so unprovoked an insult, the apostle re- 
plied, ' God shall smite thee, thou whited wall :' a 
threat which the previous details serve to prove 
wants not evidence of having taken effect. Paul, 
however, immediately restrained his anger, and 
allowed that he owed respect to the office which 
Ananias bore. After this hearing Paul was sent 
to Caesarea, whither Ananias repaired, in order to 
lay a formal charge against him before Felix, who 
postponed the matter, detaining the apostle mean- 
while, and placing him under the supervision of a 
Roman centurion (Acts xxiv.). — J. R. B. 

ANANIAS, a Christian belonging to the in- 
fant church at Jerusalem, who, conspiring with 
his wife Sapphira to deceive and defraud the 
brethren, was overtaken by sudden death, and 
immediately buried. The Christian community 
at Jerusalem appear to have entered into a solemn 
agreement, that each and all should devote their 
property to the great work of furthering the gospel 
and giving succour to the needy. Accordingly 
they* proceeded to sell their possessions, and 
brought the proceeds into the common stock of 
the church. Thus Barnabas (Acts iv. 36, 37) 
' having land, sold it, and brought the money, 

and laid it at the apostles' feet.' The apostles then 
had the general disposal, if they had not also the 
immediate distribution, of the common funds. 
The contributions, therefoie, were designed for the 
sacred purposes of religion (Acts v. 1-11). 

As all the members of the Jerusalem church 
had thus agreed to hold their property in common, 
for the furtherance of the holy work in which they 
were engaged, if any one of them withheld a 
part, and offered the remainder as the whole, he 
committed two offences — he defrauded the church, 
and was guilty of falsehood : and as his act re- 
lated not to secular but to religious affairs, and 
had an injurious bearing, both as an example, 
and as a positive transgression against the Gospel 
while it was yet struggling into existence ; Ana- 
nias lied not unto man, but unto God, and wa3 
guilty of a sin of the deepest dye. Had Ananias 
chosen to keep his property for his own worldly 
purposes, he was at liberty, as Peter intimates, so 
to do ; but he had in fact alienated it to pious 
purposes, and it was therefore no longer his own. 
Yet he wished to deal with it in part as if it 
were so, showing at the same time that he was 
conscious of his misdeed, by presenting the lesi- 
due to the common treasury as if it had been his 
entire property. He wished to satisfy his selfish 
cravings, and at the same time to enjoy the repu- 
tation of being purely disinterested, like the rest 
of the church. He attempted to serve God and 
Mammon. The original, ivo<T(ptcraTo, is much 
more expressive of the nature of his misdeed than 
our common version, ' kept back ' (part of the 
price). The Vulgate renders it ' fraudavit ;' ami 
both Wiclif and the Rheims version employ a 
corresponding term, ' deffaudid,' ' defrauded/ 
In the only other text of the New Testament 
where the word is found ^Tit. ii. 10), it is trans- 
lated ' purloining.' It is, indeed, properly applied 
to the conduct of persons who appropriate to their 
own purposes money destined for public uses. 

It is the more important to place the crime of 
Ananias and his wife in its true light, because un- 
just reflections have been cast upen the apostle 
Peter (Wolfenb. Fragm. Zzceck Jesu, p. 256) for 
his conduct in the case. Whatever that conduct 
may have been, the misdeed was of no trivial 
kind, either in itself or in its possible conse- 
quences. If, then, Peter reproves it with warmth, 
he does no more than nature and duty alike re- 
quired ; nor does there appear in his language on 
the occasion any undue or uncalled for severity. 
He sets forth the crime in its naked hcinousness, 
and leaves judgment in the hands of Him to 
whom judgment belongs. 

With strange inconsistency on the part of those 
who deny miracles altogether, unbelievers have 
accused Peter of cruelly smiting Ananias and his 
wife with instant death. The sacred narrative, 
however, ascribes to Peter nothing more than a 
spirited exposure of their aggravated offence. 
Their death, the reader is left to infer, was by the 
hand of God ; nor is any ground afforded in the 
narrative (Acts v. 1-11) for holding that Peter 
was in any way employed as an immediate in- 
strument of the miracle. 

That the death of these evil-doers was miraculous 
seems lobe implied in the record of the transaction, 
and has been the general opinion of the church. An 
attempt, however (Amnion. Krit. Jnurn.d. Thcol. 
Lit. i. 219), has been made to explain the fact 




by the supposition of apoplexy, caused by the 
shame and disgrace with which the guilty pair 
were suddenly overwhelmed at the detection of 
their baseness. If such an hypothesis might ac- 
count for the death of Ananias, it could scarcely 
suffice to explain that of his wife also ; for that 
two persons should be thus taken off by the same 
physical cause is, in the circumstances, in the 
highest degree improbable. A mathematical cal- 
culation of the doctrine of chances in the case 
would furnish the best exposure of this anti-super- 
natural explanation. 

The view now given may serve also to show 
how erroneous is the interpretation of those who, 
like Tertullian, have maintained that the words 
of Peter were a species of excommunication which 
the chief of the apostles fulminated against Ana- 
Eias and his wife. The thunders of a corrupt 
church find no sanction in the sacred record. 

The early Christian writers were divided as to 
the condition of Ananias and Sapphira in the 
unseen world. Origen, in his treatise on Matthew, 
maintains that, being purified by the punishment 
they underwent, they were saved by their faith in 
Jesus. Others, among whom are Augustin and 
Basil, argue that the severity of their punishment 
on earth showed how great their criminality had 
been, and left no hope for them hereafter : — pa- 
riter et vitam perdiderunt et salutem. — J. R. B. 

ANANIAS, a Christian of Damascus (Acts ix. 
10 ; xxii. 1*2), held in high repute, to whom the 
Lord appeared in a vision, and bade him proceed 
to ' the street which is called Straight, and inquire 
in the house of Judas for one called Saul of 
Tarsus : for, behold, he prayeth.' Ananias had 
difficulty in giving credence to the message, re- 
membering how much evil Paul had done to the 
saints at Jerusalem, and knowing that he had 
come to Damascus with authority to lay waste 
the church of Christ there. Receiving, however, 
an assurance that the persecutor had been con- 
verted, and called to the work of preaching the 
Gospel to the Gentiles, Ananias went to Pan], 
and, putting his hands on him, bade him receive 
his sight, when immediately there fell from 
his eyes as it had been scales ; and, recover- 
ing the sight which he had lost when the Lord 
appeared to him on his way to Damascus, Paul, 
the new convert, arose, and was baptized, and 
preached Jesus Christ. 

Tradition represents Ananias as the first that 
published the Gospel in Damascus, over which 
place he was subsequently made bishop : but 
having roused, by his zeal, the hatred of the 
Jews, he was seized by them, scourged, and finally 
stoned to death in his own church. — J. R. B. 

ANAPHA (HS3« ; _ Sept. x <W«&prfsi Vulg. 
caradryon and caradrium ; Eng. Vers, heron, 
Lev. xi. 19, and Deut xiv. 18), an unclean bird, 
but the particular bird denoted by the Hebrew 
word has been much disputed. The kite, wood- 
cock, curlew, peacock, parrot, crane, lapwing, 
and several others have been suggested. Since the 
word occurs but twice, and in both instances is 
isolated, no aid can be derived from a comparison 
of passages. 

Recourse has consequently been had to etymo- 
logy. The root anaph signifies to breathe, to 
snort, especially from anger, and thence, figura- 
tively, to be angry. Parkhurst observes that ' as 
the heron is remarkable for its angry disposition, 

especially when hurt or wmtnded, this bird seems 
to be most probably intended.' But this equally 
applies to a great number of different species of 
birds. Bochart supposes it may mean the moun- 
tain falcon, called dvoiraZa by Homer (Odys. i. 
320), because of the similarity of the Greek 
word to the Hebrew. But if it meant any kind 
of eagle or hawk, it would probably have been 
reckoned with one or other of those species men- 
tioned in the preceding verses. Perhaps, under 
all the circumstances, the traditional meaning 
is most likely to be correct, which it will now be 
attempted to trace. 

The Septuagint renders the Hebrew word by 
Xapadpios. Jerome, who, though professing to 
translate from the Hebrew, was no doubt well 
acquainted with the Sejrtuagint, adhered to the 
same word in a Latin form, caradryon- and cara- 
drium. The Greek and Roman writers, from the 
earliest antiquity, refer to a bird which they call 
charadrius. It is particularly described by Aris- 
totle (Hist. An. vii. 7), and by ./Elian (Hist. An. 
xv. 26). The latter naturalist derives its name 
from x a -pd3p a -> a hollow or chasm, especially one 
which contains water, because, he says, the bird 
frequents such places. It is, moreover, certain, 
that by the Romans the charadrius was also called 
icterus, which signifies the jaundice, from a notion 
that patients affected with that disease were cured 
by looking at this bird, which was of a yellow 
colour (Pliny, xxxiv.'; Ccel. Aurel. iii. 5), and 
by the Greeks, x^aipiW ; and in allusion to the 
same fabulous notion, 'iKrepos (Aristotle, Hist. An. 
ix. 13, 15, and 22; y£lian, Hist. An. iv. 47). 
These writers concur in describing a bird, some- 
times of a yellow colour, remarkable for its vora- 
city (from which circumstance arose the phrase 
XapaSpiov jSi'os, applied to a glutton), migratory, 
inhabiting watery places, and especially mountain 
torrents and valleys. 

Now, it is certain that the name charadrius 
has been applied by ornithologists to the same 
species of birds from ancient times down to the 
present age. Linnceus, under Order iv. (consist- 
ing of waders or shore birds), places the genus 
Charadrius; in which he includes all the nu- 
merous species of plovers. The ancient accounts 
may be advantageously compared with the fol- 
lowing description of the genus from Mr. Selby's 
British Ornithology, ii. 230 : • The members of this 
genus are numerous, and possess a w ide geographical 
distribution : species being found in every quarter 
of the globe. They visit the east about April. 
Some of them, during the greater part of the year, 
are the inhabitants of open districts and wide 
wastes, frequenting both dry and moist situations, 
and only retire toward the coasts during the 
severity of winter. Others are continually re- 
sident upon the banks and about the mouths of 
rivers (particularly where the shore consists of 
small gravel or shingle). They live on worms, 
insects, and their larvae. The flesh of many that 
live on the coasts is unpalatable.' 

The same writer describes one ' species, chara- 
drius pluvialis, called the golden plover from its 
colour,' and mentioiis the well-known fact that 
this species, in the course of moulting, turns com- 
pletely black. Analogous facts respecting the 
charadrius have been established by observations in 
every part of the globe, viz. that they are gregarious 
and migratory. The habits of the majority are 


littoral. They obtain their food along the banks 
of rivers and the shores of lakes ; ' like the gulls, 
they beat ths moist soil with their pattering 
feet, to terrify the incumbent worms, yet are often 
found in deserts, in green and sedgy meadows, or 
on upland moors.'' Their food consists chiefly of 
mice, worms, caterpillars, insects, toads, and 
frogs ; which of. course places them among the 
class of birds ceremonially unclean. 

On the whole, the preponderance of evidence 
derived from an unbroken chain of well ascer- 
tained facts, seems in favour of the conclusion 
that the Hebrew word anapha designates the 
numerous species of the plover (may not this be 
the genus of birds alluded to as the fowls of the 
mountain, Ps. l. 11: Isa. xviii. 6 Q. Various 
species of the genus are known in Syria and 
Palestine, as the C. pluvialis (golden plover, of 



[Charadrius pluvialis — winter plumage.] 

which a figure is here given), C. cedicnemus (stone- 
curlew), and C. spinosus (lapwing). (Kitto's 
Physical Hist, of Palestine, p. 10(5.) And, in 
connection with some of the preceding remarks, it 
is important to observe that in these species a yel- 
low colour is more or less marked. — J. F. D. 

ANATHEMA (dvddeixa), literally anything 
laid up or suspended (from dvariQyifii, to lay 
up), and hence anything laid up in a temple, 
set apart as sacred. In this general sense the 
form employed is dviQr\fia, a word of not unfre- 
quent occurrence in Greek classic authors, and 
found once in the N. T., Luke xxi. 5. The form 
dvdOefAa, as well as its meaning, appears to be 
peculiar to the Hellenistic dialect (Valckenaer, 
Schol. torn. i. p. 593). The distinction has pro- 
bably arisen from the special use made of the 
word by the Greek Jews. In the Septuagint, 
dvade/ma is the ordinary rendering of the Hebrew 
word Din, chercm (although in some instances it 
varies between the two forms, as in Lev. xxvii. 
28, 29), and in order to ascertain its meaning it 
will be necessary to inquire into the signification 
of this word. 

We find that the Din was a person or thing 
consecrated or devoted irrevocably to God, and 
that it differed from anything merely vowed or 
sanctified to the Lord in this respect, that, the 
latter could be redeemed (Lev. xxvii. 1-27), 
Whilst the former was irreclaimable (Lev. xxvii. 
21, 28) : hence, in reference to living creatures, 
the devoted thing, whether man or beast, must be 
put to death (Lev. xxvii. 29). The prominent 
idea, therefore, which the word conveyed was that 

of a person or thing devoted to destruction, or 
accursed. Thus the cities of the Canaanites were 
anathematized (Num. xxi. 2, 3), and after then- 
complete destruction the name of the jdace was 
called Hormah (TO~in ; Sept. dydOeim). Thus, 
again, the city of Jericho was made an anathema 
to the Lord (Josh. vi. 17), that is, every living 
thing in it (except Rahab and her family) was 
devoted to death ; that which could be destroyed 
by fire was burnt, and all that could not be thus 
consumed (as gold and silver) was for ever alien- 
ated from man and devoted to the use of the 
sanctuary (Josh. vi. 24). The prominence thus 
given to the idea of a thing accursed led naturally 
to the use of the word in cases where there was no 
reference whatever to consecration to the service 
of God, as in Deut. vii. 26, where an idol is 
called Din, or dvdde/j.a, and the Israelites are 
warned against idolatry lest they should be ana- 
thema like it. In these instances the term de- 
notes the object of the curse, but it is sometimes 
used to designate the curse itself (e. g. Deut. xx. 
17, Sept. ; comp. Acts xxiii. 14), and it is in 
this latter sense that the English word is generally 

In this sense, also, the Jews of later times use 
the Hebrew term, though with a somewhat dif- 
ferent meaning as to the curse intended. The 
DIP! of the Rabbins signifies excommunication 
or exclusion from the Jewish church. The more 
recent Rabbinical writers reckon three kinds or 
degrees of excommunication, all of which are 
occasionally designated by the generic term Din 
(Elias Levita, in Sepher Tisbi). The first of these, 
^1*13, is merely a temporary separation or suspen- 
sion from ecclesiastical privileges, involving, how- 
ever, various civil inconveniences, particularly 
seclusion from society to the distance of four 
cubits. The person thus excommunicated was 
not debarred entering the temple, but initead of 
going in on the right hand, as was customary, he 
was obliged to enter on the left, the usual way of 
departure : if he died whilst in this condition 
there was no mourning for him, but a stone was 
thrown on his coffin to indicate that he was se- 
parated from the people and had deserved stoning. 
Buxtorf {Lex. Chald., Talm. et Rabhin., col. 
1304) enumerates twenty-four causes of this kind 
of excommunication : it lasted thirty days and 
was pronounced without a curse. If the indi- 
vidual did not repent at the expiration of the 
term (which, however, according to Buxtorf, was 
extended in such cases to sixty or ninety days), 
the second kind of excommunication was resorted 
to. This was called simply and more properly 
D"in. It could only be pronounced by an as- 
sembly of at least ten persons, and was always 
accompanied with curses. The formula employed 
is given at length by Buxtorf {Lex. col. 828). A 
person thus excommunicated was cut off from all 
religious and social privileges : it was unlawful 
either to eat or drink with him (compare 1 Cot 
v. 11). The curse could be dissolved, however, 
by three common persons, or by one person of 
dignity. If the excommunicated person still 
continued impenitent, a yet more severe sentence 
was, according to the later Rabbins, pronounced 
against him, which was termed NnOL M (Elias 
Levita, in Tisbi). It is described as a complete 
excision from the church and the giving up of 
the individual to the judgment of God and to 




final perdition. There is, however, reason to be- 
lieve that these three grades are of recent origin. 
The Talmudists frequently use the terms by 
which the first and last are designated inter- 
changeably, and some Rabbinical writers (whom 
Lightfoot has followed in his Ilorce Hebr. et 
Talm., ad 1 Cor. v. 5) consider the last to be a 
lower grade than the second ; yet it is probable 
that the classification rests on the fact that the 
sentence was more or less severe according to 
the circumstances of the case; and though we 
cannot expect to find the three grades distinctly 
marked in the writings of the N. T., we may not 
improbably consider the phrase diroo-vvdyayov 
iroLuv, John xvi. 2 (comp. ix. 22; xii. 42), as re- 
ferring to a lighter censure than is intended by 
one or more of the three terms used in Luke vi. 
22, where perhaps different grades are intimated. 
The phrase iro.pa5i86vai tqj ao.Ta.vd, (1 Cor. v. 5; 
1 Tim. i. 20) has been by many commentators 
understood to refer to the most severe kind of 
excommunication. Even admitting the allusion, 
however, there is a very important difference be- 
tween the Jewish censure and tire formula em- 
ployed by the Apostle. In the Jewish sense it 
would signify the delivering over of the trans- 
gressor to final perdition, whilst the Apostle ex- 
pressly limits his sentence to the ' destruction of 
the flesh ' (i. e. the depraved nature), and resorts 
to it in order ' that the spirit may be saved in 
the day of the Lord Jesus.' 

But whatever diversity of opinion there may be 
as to the degrees of excommunication, it is on all 
hands admitted that the term Din, with which we 
are more particularly concerned as the equivalent 
of the Greek dvdOe/jLa, properly denotes, in its Rab- 
binical use, an excommunication accompanied 
with the most severe curses and denunciations of 
evil. We are therefore prepared to find that the 
anathema of the N. T. always implies execration ; 
but it yet remains to be ascertained whether it is 
ever used to designate a judicial act of excom- 
munication. That there is frequently no such 
reference is very clear : in some instances the 
individual denounces the anathema on himself, 
unless certain conditions are fulfilled. The 
noun and its corresponding verb are thus 
used in Acts xxiii. 12, 14, 21, and the verb 
occurs with a similar meaning in Matt. xxvi. 74; 
Mark xiv. 71. The phrase ' to call Jesus ana- 
thema ' (1 Cor. xii. 3) refers not to a judicial 
sentence pronounced by the Jewish authorities, 
but to the act of any private individual who ex- 
ecrated him and pronounced him accursed. That 
this was a common practice among the Jews ap- 
pears from the Rabbinical writings. The term, 
as it is used in reference to any who should preach 
another gospel ' Let him be anathema ' (Gal. i. 
8, 9), has the same meaning as, let him be ac- 
counted execrable and accursed. In none of 
these instances do we find any reason to think 
that the word was employed to designate specifi- 
cally and technically excommunication either 
from the Jewish or the Christian church. There 
remain only two passages in which the word oc- 
curs in the N. T., both presenting considerable 
difficulty to the translator. With regard to the 
first of these (Rom. ix. 3) Grotius and others un- 
derstand the phrase dvd9efj.a elvai dnh rod Xpicr- 
tov to signify excommunication from the Chris- 
tian church whilst most of the fathers, together 

with Tholuck, Ruckert, and a great number of 
modern interpreters, explain the term as referring 
to the Jewish practice of excommunication. On 
the other hand, Deyling, Olshausen, De Wette, 
and many more adopt the more general meaning 
of accursed. The great difficulty is to ascertain 
the extent of the evil which Paul expresses his 
willingness to undergo ; Chrysostom, Calvin, and 
many others understand it to include final separa- 
tion, not indeed from the love, but from the pre- 
sence of Christ ; others limit it to a violent death ; 
and others, again, explain it as meaning the same 
kind of curse as that under which the Jews then 
were, from which they might be delivered by re- 
pentance and the reception of the Gospel (Dey- 
lingii Observatt. Sacrce, P. II. p. 495 and sgq.). 
It would occupy too much space to refer to other 
interpretations of the passage, or to pursue the in- 
vestigation of it further. There seems, however, 
little reason to suppose that a judicial act of the 
Christian Church is intended, and we may re- 
mark that much of the difficulty which commen- 
tators have felt seems to have arisen from their 
not keeping in mind that the Apostle does not 
speak of his wish as a possible thing, and their 
consequently pursuing to all its results what 
should be regarded simply as an expression of the 
most intense desire. 

The phrase dvd0e/j.a ixaphv dda (1 Cor. xvi. 22) 
has been considered by many to be equivalent to 
the frSriD^ of the Rabbins, the most severe form 
of excommunication. This opinion is derived 
from the supposed etymological identity of 
the Syriac phrase XriK p£>, ' the Lord cometh,' 
with the Hebrew word which is considered 
by these > commentators to be derived from 
ftfliS DEJ>, ' the Name (*'. e. Jehovah) cometh.' 
This explanation, however, can rank no higher 
than a plausible conjecture, since it is sup- 
ported by no historical evidence. The Hebrew 
term is never found thus divided, nor is it ever 
thus explained by Jewish writers, who, on the 
contrary, give etymologies different from this 
(Buxtorf, Lex. col. 2166). It is moreover very 
uncertain whether this third kind of excommuni- 
cation was in use in the time of Paul ; and the 
phrase which he employs is not found in any 
Rabbinical writer (Lightfoot, Ilorce Hebr. et 
Talm., on 1 Cor. xvi. 22*). The literal meaning 
of the words is clear, but it is not easy to under- 
stand why the Syriac phrase is here employed, or 
what is its meaning in connection with anathema. 
Lightfoot supposes that the Apostle uses it to sig- 
nify that he pronounced this anathema against 
the Jews. However this may be, the supposition 
that the anathema, whatever be its precise object, 
is intended to designate excommunication from 
the Christian church, as Grotius and Augusti 
understand it, appears to rest on very slight 
grounds : it seems preferable to regard it, with 
Lightfoot, Olshausen, and most other commen- 
tators, as simply an expression of detestation. 
Though, however, we find little or no evidence of 
the use of the word anathema in the N. T. as 

* Augusti (Ha?idbach der Christl. Archaol. 
vol. iii. p. 11) has fallen into a strange mistake 
in. appealing to Buxtorf and Lightfoot in support 
of this interpretation : the former speaks very 
doubtfully on the subject, and the express object 
of the latter is to controvert it. 


the technical term fur excommunication, it is 
certain that it obtained this meaning in the early- 
ages of the church ; for it is thus employed in the 
apostolic canons, in the canons of various coun- 
cils, by Chrysostom, Theodoret., and other Greek 
fathers (Suiceri Thesaurus Ecol. sub voce, ava.- 
Qzjxa and dcpopt(T/j.6s). — F. W. G. 

ANATHOTH (flinty; Sept. 'AvaOciO), one 
of the towns belonging to the priests in the tribe 
of Benjamin, and as such a city of refuge (Josh. 
xxi. 18 ; Jer. i. 1). It occurs also in 2 Sam. 
xxiii. 27 ; Ezra ii. 23 ; Neh. vii. 27 ; but is 
chiefly memorable as the birthplace and usual 
residence of the prophet Jeremiah (Jer. i. 1 ; xi. 
21-23 ; xxix. 27), whose name it seems to have 
borne in the time of Jerome, ' Anathoth, quae 
hoclie appellate Jeremise ' ( Onomast. s. v. Ana- 
thoth). The same writer {Comment, in Jer. i. 1) 
places Anathoth three Roman miles north of Je- 
rusalem, which correspond with the twenty stadia 
assigned by Josephus (Antiq. x. 7. 3). Pro- 
fessor Robinson appears to have discovered this 
place in the present village of Anata, at the 
distance of an hour and a quarter from Jeru- 
salem. It is seated on a broad ridge of hills, 
and commands an extensive view of the eastern 
slope, of the mountainous tract of Benjamin ; 
including also the valley of the Jordan, and 
the northern part of the Dead Sea. It seems 
to have been once a walled town and a place of 
strength. Portions of the wall still remain, built 
of large hewn stones, and apparently ancient, as 
are also the foundations of some of the houses. 
It is now a small and very poor village. From 
the vicinity a favourite kind of building-stone is 
carried to Jerusalem. Troops of donkeys are met 
with employed in this service, a hewn stone being 
slung on each side; the larger stones are trans- 
ported on camels (Robinson, Researches, ii. 109; 
Raumer's Paldstina, p. 169). 
ANCHOR. [Ship.] 

ANDREW ('Aspects), one of the twelve 
apostles. His name is of Greek origin, but was 
in use amongst the Jews, as appears from a 
passage quoted from the Jerusalem Talmud by 
Lightfoot (Harmony, Luke v. 10). He was 
a native of the city of Bethsaida in Galilee, and 
brother of Simon Peter. He was at first a dis- 
ciple of John the Baptist, and was led to receive 
Jesus as the Messiah in consequence of John's 
expressly pointing him out as ' the Lamb of God ' 
(John i. 36). His first care, after he had satis- 
fied himself as to the validity of the claims of 
Jesus, was to bring to him his brother Simon. 
Neither of them, however, became at that time 
stated attendants on our Lord ; for we find that 
they were still pursuing their occupation of fisher- 
men on the sea of Galilee when Jesus, after John's 
imprisonment, called them to follow him (Mark 
i. 14, 16). Very little is related of Andrew by 
any of the evangelists : the principal incidents in 
winch his name occurs during the life of Christ 
are, the feeding of the five thousand (Jolin vi. 9); 
his introducing to our Lord certain Greeks who 
desired to see him (John xii. 22) ; and his asking, 
1 along with his brother Simon and the two sons 
flf Zebedee, for a further explanation of what our 
Lord had said in reference to the destruction of 
the temple (Mark xiii. 3). Of his subsequent 
history and labours we have no authentic record. 
Tradition assigns Scythia (Euseb. iii. 1, 71), 



Greece (Theodoret, i. 1425), anu Thrace (Hip- 
poly tus, ii. 30) as the scenes of his ministry : he 
is said to have suffered crucifixion at Patree in 
Achaia, on a cross of the form called Crux de- 
cussata (X), and commonly known as ' St. An- 
drew's cross ' (Winer's Bibl. Reahoorterbuch, sub 
voce). His relics, it is said, were afterwards 
removed from Patrae to Constantinople. An apo- 
cryphal book, bearing the title of ' The Acts of 
Andrew,' is mentioned by Eusebius, Epiphanius, 
and others. It is now completely lost, and seems 
never to have been received except by some here- 
tical sects, as the Encratites, Origenians, &c. 
This book, as well as a ' Gospel of St. Andrew,' 
was declared apocryphal by the decree of Pope 
Gelasius (Jones, On the Canon, vol. i. p. 179 and 
sqq.) [Acts, Spurious ; Gospels, Spurious]. — 

F. W. G. 

1. ANDRONICUS QAvSpoviicos), the regent- 
governor of Antioch in the absence of Antiochus 
Epiphanes, who, at the instigation of Menelaus, 
put to death the deposed high-priest Onias ; for 
which deed he was himself ignominiously slain 
on the return of Antiochus (2 Mace, iv.) b.c. 
169 [Onias]. 

2. ANDRONICUS, a Jewish Christian, the 
kinsman and fellow-prisoner of Paul (Rom. 
xvi. 7). 

1. ANER ("I3J?; Sept. Avvdv), ESHCOL, and 
MAMRE, three Canaanitish chiefs in the neigh- 
bourhood of Hebron, who joined their forces with 
those of Abraham in pursuit of Chedorlaomer and 
his allies, who had pillaged Sodom and carried 
Lot away captive (Gen. xiv. 24). These chiefs 
did not, however, imitate the disinterested conduct 
oi the patriarch, but retained their portion of the 
spoil [Abraham]. 

2. ANER, a city of Manasseh, given to the 
Levites of Kohath's family (1 Chron. vi. 70). 

ANETHON (&vneov) occurs in Matt, xxiii. 
23, where it is rendered anise, ' Woe unto you — 
for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin.' 
By the Greek and Roman writers it was employed 
to designate a plant used both medicinally and 
as an article of diet. The Arabian translators of 
the Greek medical authors give as its synonyme 

L^-w*j shabit, the name applied in eastern 

countries to an umbelliferous plant with flattened 
fruit commonly called ' seed,' which is surrounded 
with a dilated margin. In Europe the word has 
always been used to denote a similar plant, which 
is familiarly known by the name of Dill. Hence 
there is no doubt that in the above passage, in- 
stead of ' anise,' dvrjdov should have been trans- 
lated 'dill;' and it is said to be rendered by a 
synonymous word in every version except our 

The common dill, or anethum graveolens, is 
an annual plant, growing wild among the corn 
in Spain and Portugal ; and on the coast of 
Italy, in Egypt, ami about Astracan. It re- 
sembles fennel, but is smaller, has more glau- 
cous leaves, and a less pleasant smell : the fruit 
or seeds, which are finely divided by capillary 
segments, are elliptical, broader, flatter, and sur- 
rounded with a membraneous disk. They have 
a warm and aromatic taste, owing to the presence 
of a pale yellow volatile oil, which itself has a 
hot taste and a peculiar penetrating oflour. 

l 2 



The error in translation here pointed out is 
not of very great consequence, as both the anise 
and the dill are umbelliferous plants, which are 

[Anethum graveolens.] 

found cultivated in the south of Europe. The 
eeeds of both are employed as condiments and 
carminatives, and have been so from very early 
times; but the anethon is more especially a 
genus of eastern cultivation, since either the dill 
or another species is reared in all the countries 
from Syria to India, and known by the name 
sliubit; while the anise, though known, appears 
to be so only by its Greek name aviffov. Rosen- 
mull er, moreover, says, ' In the tract Massroth 
(of Tithes), cap. iv. \ 5, we read, " The seed, the 
leaves, and the stem of dill (D2K> shaboth) are, 
according to Rabbi Eliezer, subject to tithe,'" 
which indicates that the herb was eaten, as is 
indeed the case with the eastern species in the 
present day ; and, therefore, to those acquainted 
with the cultivated plants of eastern countries, 
the dill will appear more appropriate than anise 
in the above passage. 

ANGELS ('AyyeXoi, used in the Sept. and 
New Test, for the Hebrew D^PP ; sing. ^K?»), 
a word signifying both in Hebrew and Greek 
messengers, and therefore used to denote what- 
ever God employs to execute his purposes, or to 
manifest his presence or his power. In some pas- 
sages it occurs in the sense of an ordinary mes- 
senger (Job i. 14; 1 Sam. xi. 3; Lukevii. 4; ix. 
52) : in others it is applied to prophets (Isa. xliii. 
19; Hag. i. 13; Mai. hi.): to priests (Eccl. v. 
5 ; Mai. ii. 7) : to ministers of tbe New Testa- 
ment (Rev. i. 20). It is also applied to imper- 
sonal agents ; as to the pillar of cloud (Exod. 
xiv. 19) : to the pestilence (2 Sam. xxiv. 16, 17 ; 
2 Kings xix. 30) : to the winds (' who maketh the 
winds his angels,' Ps. civ. 4) : so likewise, 
plagues generally, are called ' evil angels ' (Ps. 
lxxviii. 49), and Paul calls his thorn in the 
flesh an ' angel of Satan ' (2 Cor. xii. 7). 

But this name is more eminently and distinc- 
tively applied to certain spiritual beings or 
heavenly intelligences, employed by God as the 
ministers of His will, and usually distinguished 
as angels of God or angels of Jehovah. In 
this case the name has respect to their official 
capacity as ' messengers,' and not to their nature 
or condition. The term ' spirit,' on the other 
hand (in Greek irvev/xa, in Hebrew nil), has re- 
ference to iiie nature of angels, and characterizes 
them as incorporeal and invisible essences. But 


neither the Hebrew YVT\ nor the Greek irfevfia, 
nor even the Latin spiritus, corresponds exactly 
to the English spirit, which is opposed to matter, 
and designates what is immaterial ; whereas the 
other terms are not opposed to matter, but to body, 
and signify not what is immaterial, but what is 
incorporeal. The modern idea of spirit was un- 
known to the ancients. They conceived spirits 
to be incorporeal and invisible, but not imma- 
terial, and supposed their essence to be a pure air 
or a subtile fire. The proper meaning of -Kvevfju 
(from nvea>, I blow, I breathe) is air in motion, 
wind, breath. The Hebrew HI"! is of the same 
import ; as is also the Latin spiritus, from spiro, 
I blow, I breathe. When, therefore, the ancient 
Jews called angels spirits, they did not mean to 
deny that they were endued with bodies. When 
the j' affirmed that angels were incorporeal, they 
used the term in the sense in which it was un- 
derstood by the ancients ; — that is, as free from 
the impurities of gross matter. The distinction 
between ' a natural body ' and ' a spiritual body ' 
is indicated by St. Paul (1 Cor. xv. 44) ; and 
we may, with sufficient safety, assume that angels 
are spiritual bodies, rather than pure spirits in the 
modem acceptation of the word. . 

It is disputed whether the term Elohim DTQ^ 
is ever applied to angels, but the inquiiy belongs 
to another place [Elohim]. It may suffice here 
to observe that both in Ps. viii. 5, and xcvii. 7, 
the word is rendered by angels in the Sept. and 
other ancient versions ; and both these texts are so 
cited in Keb. i. .6 ; ii. 7, that they are called 
Beni-Elohim, QWtt 03, Sons of God. In the 
Scriptures we have frequent notices of spiritual 
intelligences, existing in another state of being, 
and constituting a celestial family, or hierarchy, 
over which Jehovah presides. The Bible does 
not, however, treat of this matter professedly and 
as a doctrine of religion, but merely adverts to it 
incidentally as a fact, without furnishing any 
details to gratify curiosity. It speaks of no obli- 
gations 1o these spirits, and indicates no duties 
to be performed towards them. A belief in the 
existence of such beings is not, therefore, an essen- 
tial article of religion, any more than a belief 
that there are other worlds besides our own : but 
such a belief serves to enlarge our ideas of the 
works of God, and to illustrate the greatness of 
his power and wisdom (Mayer, Am. Bib. Repos. 
xii. 360). The practice of the Jews, of referring 
to the agency of angels every manifestation of 
the greatness and power of God, has led some to 
contend that angels have no real existence, but 
are mere personifications of unknown powers of 
nature : and we are reminded that, in like man- 
ner, among the Gentiles, whatever was wonderful, 
or strange, or unaccountable, was referred by 
them to the agency of some one of their gods. 
Among the numerous passages in which angels 
are mentioned, there are, however, a few which 
cannot, without improper force, be reconciled 
with this hypothesis. It may be admitted that 
the passages in which angels are described as 
speaking and delivering messages, might be inter- 
preted of forcible or apparently supernatural sug- 
gestions to the mind : but they are sometimes 
represented as performing acts which are wholly 
inconsistent with this notion (Gen. xvi. 7-12 ; 
Judg. xiii. 1-21 ; Matt, xxviii. 2-4); and if Matt. 
xx. 30, stood alone in its testimony, it ought te 


settle the question. Christ there says, that ' in the 
resurrection they neither marry nor are given in 
marriage, but are as the angels of God.'' The 
force of this passage cannot be eluded by the 
hypothesis [Accommodation] that Christ mingled 
with his instructions the erroneous notions of 
those to whom they were addressed, seeing that he 
spoke to Sadducees, who did not believe in the 
existence of angels (Acts xxiii. 8). So likewise, 
the passage in which the high dignity of Christ is 
established, by arguing that he is superior to the 
angels (Heb. i. 4. sqq.), would be without force or 
meaning if angels had no real existence. 

That these superior beings are very numerous is 
evident from the following expressions, Dan. vii. 10, 
' thousands of thousands,' and ' ten thousand times 
ten thousand;' Matt. xxvi. 53, ' more than twelve 
legions of angels ;' Luke ii. 13, 'multitude of the 
heavenly host ;' Heb. xii. 22, 23, ' myriads of 
angels. 1 It is probable, from the nature of the 
case, that among so great a multitude there may be 
different grades and classes, and even natures — 
ascending from man towards God, and forming a 
chain of being to fill up the vast space between the 
Creator and man — the lowest of his intellectual 
creatures. This may be inferred from the analo- 
gies which pervade the drain of being on the earth 
whereon we live, which is as much the divine crea- 
tion as the world of spirits. Accordingly the Scrip- 
ture describes angels as existing in a society com- 
posed of members of unequal dignity, power, and 
excellence, and as having chiefs and rulers. It is 
admitted that this idea is not clearly expressed 
in the books composed before the Babylonish cap- 
tivity ; but it is developed in the books written 
during the exile and afterwards, especially in the 
writings of Daniel and Zechariah. In Zech. i. II, 
an angel of the highest order, one who stands be- 
fore God, appears in contrast with angels of an 
inferior class, whom he employs as his messengers 
and agents (comp. iii. 7). In Dan. x. 13, the ap- 
pellation p^XIH ")b>, and in xii. 1, JHiH 1& 
are given to Michael. The Grecian Jews ren- 
dered this appellation by the term dpxdyyeAos, 
Archangel, which occurs in the New Testament 
(Jude 9; 1 Thess. iv. 16), where we are taught 
that Christ vij. 11 appear to judge the world h cpaivii 
apxayytAov. This word denotes, as the very 
analogy of^lie language teaches, a chief of the 
angels, one superior to the other angels, like 
dpx^pevs, dpx^rpdrrjyos, dpxurwdyaiyos. The 
opinion, therefore, that there were various orders 
of angels, was not peculiar to the Jews ; but was 
held by Christians in the time of the apostles, and 
is mentioned by the apostles themselves. The 
distinct divisions of the angels, according to their 
rank in the heavenly hierarchy, which we find in 
the writings of the later Jews, were either almost 
or wholly unknown in the apostolical period. The 
appellations dpxa'h el-ovcriat, Swd.iJ.eLS, Bpovot, 
Kvpt6rr)Tes, are, indeed, applied in Ejih. i. 21, 
Col. i. 16, and elsewhere, to the angels ; not, 
however, to them exclusively, or with the intention 
of denoting (heir particular classes ; but to them 
in common with all beings possessed of might 
and power, visible as well as invisible, on earth 
as well as in heaven. 

In the Scriptures angels appear with bodies, 
and in the human form ; and no intimation is any- 
where given that these bodies are not real, or that 
they are only assumed for the time and then laid 



aside. It was manifest indeed to the ancienta 
that the matter of these bodies was not like that 
of their own, inasmuch as angels could make 
themselves visible and vanish again from their 
sight. But this experience would suggest no 
doubt of the reality of their bodies : it would 
only intimate that they were not composed of 
gross matter. After his resurrection, Jesus often 
appeared to his disciples, and vanished again 
before them ; yet they never doubted that they saw 
the same body which had been crucified, although 
they must have perceived that it had under- 
gone an important change. The fact that angels 
always appeared in the human form, does not in- 
deed, prove that they really have this form ; but 
that the ancient Jews believed so. That which is 
not pure spirit must have some form or other : 
and angels may have the human form ; but other 
forms are possible. The question as to the food 
of angels has been very much discussed. If they 
do eat, we can know nothing of their actual food ; 
for the manna is manifestly called ' angels' food ' 
(Ps. lxxviii. 25 ; Wisd. xvi. 20), merely by way 
of expressing its excellence. The only real ques- 
tion, therefore, is whether they feed at all or not. 
We sometimes find angels, in their terrene mani- 
festations, eating and drinking (Gen. xviii. 8 ; 
xix. 3) ; but in Judg. xiii. 15, 16, the angel who 
appeared to Manoah declined, in a very pointed 
manner, to accept his hospitality. The manner 
in which the Jews obviated the apparent discre- 
pancy, and